On Sat, Jun 27, 2015 at 12:25 AM, Junio C Hamano <gits...@pobox.com> wrote:
> Matthieu Moy <matthieu....@imag.fr> writes:
>
>>> Matthieu Moy <matthieu....@imag.fr> writes:
>>>
>>>> + git bisect terms <term-old> <term-new>
>>>
>>> I think this is the other way around.
>>
>> Indeed.
>
> I hate to be saying this, but this is a strong indication that
> consistency with "start $bad $good..." must be broken. If the
> person who has been working on this topic for a few iterations in
> the past few days cannot get it right, no ordinary user can. With
> or without a mnemonic hint "N comes before O, so does B before G".
>
> Of course we cannot just say "git bisect terms old new". That would
> only invite "eh, I do not remember, which between terms and start
> take the old one first?" without helping people.
>
> The best I can come up with is to forbid positional arguments to
> this subcommand and always require them to be given like so:
>
> git bisect terms --old=fast --new=slow
> git bisect terms --new=slow --old=fast
If we don't want to support positional arguments, then I would suggest
supporting first the following instead:
git bisect terms --name-good=fast --name-bad=slow
git bisect terms --name-bad=slow --name-good=fast
This would make the interface consistent with the code.
Of course we could also accept --name-old and --name-new as synonyms
for --name-good and --name-bad.
> We may want to start supporting
>
> git bisect start --new=master --old=maint
Maybe we could also support:
git bisect start --name-good=fast --name-bad=slow --fast=maint --slow=master
--
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
