Hi all,
Here is my bisect dunno patch series again.

The changes since last time are the following:
[PATCH 1/7] rev-list: implement --bisect-all

[PATCH 2/7] Bisect: fix some white spaces and empty lines breakages.
-> No change.
[PATCH 3/7] Bisect: implement "bisect dunno" to mark untestable revisions.
-> Added dunno stuff in "bisect_replay" that I had forgotten.

-> Use "bisect_write_good" and "bisect_write_bad" in "bisect_replay"

while at it.
[PATCH 4/7] Bisect: factorise "bisect_write_*" functions.

[PATCH 5/7] Bisect: factorise some logging into "bisect_write".

[PATCH 6/7] Bisect: factorise "bisect_{bad,good,dunno}" into "bisect_state".
-> Some new factorisation and clean up work.
[PATCH 7/7] Bisect: add "bisect dunno" to the documentation.
-> Document "bisect dunno" and fix some short usage descriptions.
Regards,

Christian.
-

I now have this series queued in my pu branch.  It passes the tests

it comes with, and doesn't appear to break anything, but apparently

there is also still some debate about what a dunno should be called

("unknown", "void", "ugly", "dunno", "skip" ...).
--

Shawn.

-

Hi,
AFAICT these are all bikeshed painting arguments, not technical arguments.

I was initially opposed to having --bisect-all, wanting to have

--bisect-dunno <ref>...
But in the end, the people doing the work decide, and therefore I am fine

with --bisect-all, especially since it seems clean enough for me.
As for all those "dunno is no English"...  I'd first merge the technical

part (i.e. what you have now in pu), and then let the discussion about

which synonyms to choose continue, until a consensus is formed about other

names (if there is a consensus at all!).
IMHO there is no reason to hold of the fine work of Christian, just

because there are non-technical arguments still in the air.
I want bisect dunno.  Even if there is another name later.
Ciao,

Dscho
-

Hi,
It's also the fine work of Junio as he wrote most of 
Thanks for your kind words,

Christian.
-

Hi,
Thanks for doing this.  I think that especially the factorisation adds

tremendously to the readibility.
Ciao,

Dscho
-

Good work on the series, Christian, but don't you think that

"unknown" would sound a little bit better than "dunno"? For people

who don't speak English as a second language "dunno" might not be

immediately clear.
Cheers,

Wincent
-

"undecided"?
--

David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum

-

I choosed "dunno" because that was what Dscho suggested in this thread:
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/53584/focus=53595
It seems to me short and understandable at the same time.
More meaningfull would be "untestable" or "cannottest" or "canttest" but

it's much longer, while "good" and "bad" are short.
Christian.
-

Hi,
I guess this discussion means that nobody has anything technical to argue

about.  IOW your patch series is good...
;-)
Ciao,

Dscho
-

Ugly?  Neutral?
René

-

"Ugly" has a certain charm to it but would probably not translate

well.  "Limbo" would be another such candidate, probably with better

translatability.  But while some of those have some geeky appeal, I

really think something reasonably plain like "undecided" would be

better in the long run.
--

David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum

-

"undecided" sounds good to me. It should be clear to non-native

speakers of English (at least, clearer than "dunno").
<personal opinion>

   Another problem with "dunno" is that it might come across as a bit

unprofessional due to its informality. Yes, you'll find it in most

dictionaries, but always with a qualifier of "slang", "colloquial",

"casual", "pronunciation spelling" or similar.

</personal opinion>
Cheers,

Wincent
-

What about just "unknown"?
--=20

=2Emarius

I tend to nitpick to the degree of silliness when my own suggestions

are concerned, but "unknown" sounds to me like the state _before_ the

test.  If a person says he is "undecided" about something that means

that he _has_ thought about it already.  "Undecidable" might bring

this distinction across more strongly, but it is a more complicated

word and it insinuates that it is _impossible_ to come to a decision

regardless of the spent effort.
"unknown" clearly is much better than "dunno" though even if my own

favorite would be "undecided".
--

David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum

-

What then about a good'ol programming favorite, "void"? :-)
I agree that "unknown" might be a state even _before_ a person has=20

determined if a case is good or bad (same for 'dunno' actually: "- Do=20

you know if it works? - I dunno yet") When I think more about it, I=20

really like "void"..
"Argh, this test is void, because someone messed with it"

"We can't make heads or tails of this one, so it must be void"
--=20

=2Emarius

"skip"? That would make semantic sense, right?
Dave.

-

Yeah, or "avoid".
Christian.

-

...or we could go all spaghetti western, and call it "ugly".
(as in "git-bisect [the <good>, the <bad> and the <ugly>]")
Have fun! :)
...Johan
--

Johan Herland, <johan@herland.net>

www.herland.net

-

<personal opinion>

   Yes, it's funny, but I don't think an SCM interface is a place for

jokes or puns. Git already has one big tongue-in-cheek attribute:

it's name, so let's leave it at that.

</personal opinion>
Cheers,

Wincent
-

That's also why I suggested "skip"; you might not be able to test a

particular commit, but you might also not *want* to test a particular

commit for some reason.
Dave.

-

Skip seems a great choice: it directly expresses the wish to

not consider a certain commit. The reason is unimportant.
-

But it is an _action_, while "good" and "bad" are properties.
--

David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum

-

Well, this has been debated to death, but I actually think that "skip" is

a good choice, exactly because it's an action.
"good" and "bad" do indeed describe properties of the commit, and are used

to describe the state of the tree in question. In contrast, "git bisect

skip" says not somethign about the state of that tree - it talks about

what we should *do* with that tree.
IOW, I think "git bisect skip" in some sense has more to do with an action

like "git bisect start", than with "good" or "bad". 
(Yes, "good" and "bad" have an action associated with them too - namely to

start the next bisection event - but they are not named according to the

action they cause, but because they describe the tree state)
			Linus

-

Hi,
Could we, _please_, first decide if the implementation has merits, and

just apply it as is in that case?  We can rename it whatever anybody likes

later, and we can paint the bikeshed brown if you want to.
Ciao,

Dscho

-

I figured with something like this, it'd be a lot easier to get the

colour right first, since command UI is harder to repaint if it gets

widely adopted. Anyway, I think the patch itself is a very good

feature.
Dave.

-

I thought everybody really agreed that being able to skip commits that you

cannot say good/bad about is a feature worth doing?
Right now we actually have some docs in the man-page about doing that

avoidance manually, so it's not like it's debatable whether this issue

comes up. It most definitely does come up.
Does anybody really think it's not a good feature? And I've not seen

negative comments about the implementation either apart from some small

details that I think got fixed up already (but maybe the complaints were

all hidden by the shed color discussions ;)
			Linus

-

"skipped", then. Either way, something like this has got to be much

better than "dunno".
Dave.

-

"good" and "bad" are descriptive.  "to be skipped" would be necessary
"undecided" still has my vote, and I could live with "unknown".

Everything that has been proposed since then is, in my opinion,

strictly worse.
--

David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum

-

Yet another very short word: void.
I'm thinking about ticket copies that sometimes are marked "void" so you cannot use it.
-- robin
-

My vote is for "supercalifragilisticexpialidocious". It's clearly

superior to the 1500 other suggestions in this thread.
--

Karl Hasselström, kha@treskal.com

      www.treskal.com/kalle

-

(Not intended as an attack on this particular suggestion, by the way.

Sorry if it sounded a bit harsh.)
--

Karl Hasselström, kha@treskal.com

      www.treskal.com/kalle

-

I would think that tongue-in-cheek.  In case it was serious, I'd

consider it one of those cases where it would make good sense to

overrule the geek penchant for quirkiness.
Just think about the nuisance of finding adequate translations in

i18n: "Woaßnet", "Eh?", "Chepas" etc.
--

David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum

-

Well, that won't be a problem, as commands and their subcommands and

options aren't translated.
--

Andreas Ericsson                   andreas.ericsson@op5.se

OP5 AB                             www.op5.se

Tel: +46 8-230225                  Fax: +46 8-230231

-

Doh, I meant to say "people who don't speak English as a *first*

language".
Cheers,

Wincent
-