Hi, On Fri, 11 Jul 2008, Christian Couder wrote: > Le jeudi 10 juillet 2008, Junio C Hamano a écrit : > > > - "Test this merge-base before going forward, please" will add > > typically only one round of check (if you have more merge bases > > between good and bad, you need to test all of them are good to be > > sure), so it is not "slower nor more complex". > > By "slower" I meant that it would need more rounds of check on average. > By "more complex" I meant that more code is needed. > > And I think you are right, all the merge bases need to be tested so I > will send a patch on top of the patch discussed here. Good luck. This will open the scenario where people use a proper ancestor as "good" revision. In this case, you test that. If it is "bad" you report that it is the _first_ one. You are opening a can of worms here, and I doubt that this is a good idea. git-bisect as-is has very precise, and _simple_ semantics, and users should really know what they are doing (i.e. not marking something as "good" which is on a branch containing a fix). Trying to be too clever here might just make the whole tool rather useless. Ciao, Dscho
