Thiago Macieira wrote: > If I choose one of the z commits to the left of X (let's say, Z), they'll > test Good, which means I can exclude the A-Z commits from my list. If I > choose one of the z commits to the right of X, they'll test bad and I > should exclude from there to B. If I choose a commit from the AYB branch > (say, Y), and it tests good, I can only exclude A-Y, whe the remainder > commits still left (y3 to y5). > > So this is a bisection, but a weird one because you're still excluding > less than half of the remaining commits, as you're jumping from branch to > branch. > > Anyway, the point is made: since you are excluding less than half at each > iteration, the number of iterations to find the culprit is actually bigger > than a linear history.
But git is smarter than that. It actually picks z9, because it knows the result of testing z9 will exclude all of the Y side (if it's bad), or all of Z ( if it's good). And if the branches are off balance, it picks a point will still "split" the difference roughly in half. a. _______________________________________________ Kde-scm-interest mailing list [email protected] https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-scm-interest
