Jeff King <peff@xxxxxxxx> writes: > On Fri, Jun 10, 2022 at 10:28:04AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > >> I looked at an "scripted" version in the ancient past and it seems >> to have computed by iterating over >> >> git rev-list bisect/bad --not $good_revs >> >> which would have given these intermediate ones roughly in the >> reverse chronological order. It could be that the behaviour >> regressed when the scripted version was rewritten in C, but I dunno. >> >> Christian (as an "area" expert for bisect), do you have any >> comments? > > It would probably be nice to show them as --oneline, as well. I'd guess > that a human reading the subjects of a handful of commits could quickly > make a good guess as to the actual culprit. True, too. The scripted version fed the output from above iteration each to "show-branch" (as "git log --oneline" was probably not so widely used or may not have been available back then), to make them human readable. We should be able to use pretty.c::pretty_print_commit() with CMT_FMT_ONELINE to do that more easily these days. By the way, welcome back ;-)
