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
