Skip Menu |

This queue is for tickets about the App-SVN-Bisect CPAN distribution.

Report information
The Basics
Id: 84681
Status: open
Priority: 0/
Queue: App-SVN-Bisect
People
Owner: Nobody in particular
Requestors: mattack [...] apple.com
Cc:
AdminCc:
Bug Information
Severity: (no value)
Broken in: (no value)
Fixed in: (no value)

History Show all quoted text
  Tue Apr 16 16:47:52 2013 mattack [...] apple.com - Ticket created
Subject: Suggestion for svn-bisect with no params
Date: Tue, 16 Apr 2013 13:47:37 -0700 (PDT)
To: bug-App-SVN-Bisect [...] rt.cpan.org
From: Matt Ackeret <mattack [...] apple.com>
I'm *just starting* with svn-bisect, so I think this is more of an enhancement request than a bug. After figuring out the dependencies, and getting it running, I do: % svn-bisect start nothing happened (yes I didn't RTFM well enough) so I do: % svn-bisect help start Usage: svn-bisect [--min <rev>] [--max <rev>] start then I try.. % svn-bisect -min 37332 -max 37768 start A bisect is already in progress. Try svn-bisect help reset Basically -- I *know* --min and --max are called options, but if they aren't specified, what is used? 1 and the latest checkin? My suggestion is to either make these required, or print out something when --min and --max aren't specified to tell me that it actually 'started' a session.
  Wed Apr 17 06:08:34 2013 INFINOID [...] cpan.org - Correspondence added
Hi Matt, Thanks for taking the time to mention this. On Tue Apr 16 16:47:52 2013, mattack@apple.com wrote: Show quoted text
> Basically -- I *know* --min and --max are called options, but if they > aren't > specified, what is used? 1 and the latest checkin?
Well, nothing. If the start and end revisions aren't specified immediately, it expects you to specify them later on. This mirrors the behavior of "git bisect", which the tool was inspired by. This is what that usage looks like (from the git bisect docs): $ git bisect start $ git bisect bad # Current version is bad $ git bisect good v2.6.13-rc2 # v2.6.13-rc2 was the last version # tested that was good With that being said, it sounds like it might not be the most intuitive behavior for people not familiar with this style of interface. Do you think it would be clearer if "svn-bisect start" ran "svn-bisect view" at the end, when the start/end revisions are not specified immediately? That would cause it to print something like: Not enough information has been given to start yet. Bisecting may begin when a starting and ending revision are specified. Thanks, Mark
  Wed Apr 17 06:08:34 2013 The RT System itself - Status changed from 'new' to 'open'