Stefan Sperling wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 21, 2011 at 09:35:54AM +0100, Julian Foad wrote:
> > Here's one I wrote a few months back. I didn't send it here because I
> > didn't think it was a serious proposition, just something fun to
> > exercise my brain cells. :-)
> >
> > One thing "git bisect" does that's not implemented here is to support a
> > third response, "unable to test", and skip such revisions. I tried
> > thinking about an algorithm to do that nicely, but didn't get anywhere
> > really concrete.
>
> It should also detect whether an update to a particular revision
> actually affected the working copy, stop if it did not, and print
> the previous revision as the suspect. Non-operative revisions are
> especially likely in repositories such as ours which are shared
> by many projects.
My patch retrieves the list of operative revisions on the specified
subtree, and binary-searches through that list, not through all possible
revision numbers.
- Julian
Received on 2011-06-21 11:01:18 CEST