Re: [PATCH 0/7] Bisect dunno

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



"David Symonds" <dsymonds@xxxxxxxxx> writes:

> On 16/10/2007, David Kastrup <dak@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>> Geert Bosch <bosch@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>>
>> > On Oct 15, 2007, at 13:53, David Symonds wrote:
>> >> That's also why I suggested "skip"; you might not be able to test a
>> >> particular commit, but you might also not *want* to test a particular
>> >> commit for some reason.
>> >
>> > Skip seems a great choice: it directly expresses the wish to
>> > not consider a certain commit. The reason is unimportant.
>>
>> But it is an _action_, while "good" and "bad" are properties.
>
> "skipped", then.

"good" and "bad" are descriptive.  "to be skipped" would be necessary
to fit it.

> Either way, something like this has got to be much better than
> "dunno".

"undecided" still has my vote, and I could live with "unknown".
Everything that has been proposed since then is, in my opinion,
strictly worse.

-- 
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel Development]     [Gcc Help]     [IETF Annouce]     [DCCP]     [Netdev]     [Networking]     [Security]     [V4L]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]     [Fedora Users]

  Powered by Linux