Issue 19311: devguide: hg bisect section could be clearer (original) (raw)

Issue19311

Created on 2013-10-20 10:57 by numerodix, last changed 2022-04-11 14:57 by admin. This issue is now closed.

Messages (4)
msg200565 - (view)	Author: Martin Matusiak (numerodix) *	Date: 2013-10-20 10:57
The offending section: http://docs.python.org/devguide/faq.html#how-do-i-find-which-changeset-introduced-a-bug-or-regression I think this could be improved a bit. The key point is that "hg bisect --bad/good" is a command relative to the checked out changeset. So the instructions tell me to run "hg bisect --bad" and then "hg bisect --good", but they could do with a more explicit instruction to run "hg update " in between. - You can conveniently choose a faraway changeset (for example a former release), and check that it is indeed “good” This could be construed as just peeking at the changeset using hg log or whatever, not actually checking it out. - Mercurial will automatically bisect so as to narrow the range of possible culprits, until a single changeset is isolated. Here too it could be made more explicit that mercurial will navigate to (ie. check out each changeset) as it's doing this, so that at every invocation of "hg bisect --bad/good" the changeset to be tested is checked out for you, not merely computed.
msg200618 - (view)	Author: Antoine Pitrou (pitrou) *	Date: 2013-10-20 19:13
I don't think we want the devguide to become a Mercurial manual. Also, it is easy to get help for a Mercurial command: just type "hg help bisect".
msg200645 - (view)	Author: Roundup Robot (python-dev)	Date: 2013-10-20 22:38
New changeset 24c2cfee3b06 by Ezio Melotti in branch 'default': #19311: mention hg update in the bisect faq. http://hg.python.org/devguide/rev/24c2cfee3b06
msg200646 - (view)	Author: Ezio Melotti (ezio.melotti) *	Date: 2013-10-20 22:40
I agree with Antoine, but mentioning hg update is a good idea so I changed that.