Matthieu Moy <matthieu....@grenoble-inp.fr> writes:

> Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy <pclo...@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> --- a/t/t6030-bisect-porcelain.sh
>> +++ b/t/t6030-bisect-porcelain.sh
>> @@ -164,7 +164,7 @@ test_expect_success 'bisect start: existing 
>> ".git/BISECT_START" not modified if
>>      cp .git/BISECT_START saved &&
>>      test_must_fail git bisect start $HASH4 foo -- &&
>>      git branch > branch.output &&
>> -    test_i18ngrep "* (no branch)" branch.output > /dev/null &&
>> +    test_i18ngrep "* (bisecting other)" branch.output > /dev/null &&
>
> I'd have spelled it (no branch, bisecting other) to make it clear that
> we're on detached HEAD, and avoid confusing old-timers. But maybe your
> version is enough, I'm not sure.

Yeah, I do not think "bisecting other" alone makes much sense.

What does "other" refer to when you start your bisection at a
detached head?  I personally think "other" has _any_ value in that
message, because "(no branch, bisecting)" gives the same amount of
information, especially because "other" does not say which branch it
refers to at all.

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Reply via email to