To be honest with you, I re-read this multiple times and I still can't fathom how doing this manually could ever be better than having it done automatically. Ev

To be honest with you, I re-read this multiple times and I still can't fathom how doing this manually could ever be better than having it done automatically. Even if I had to bisect one million commits, it would be at most about 21 iterations. Cutting down an iteration or two near the end just doesn't seem very useful to me in exchange for having to manually pick commits to bisect with. Also, nothing in particular stops me from viewing the log. In fact, the `git bisect visualize` command is for the exact thing you are describing. You can easily narrow your bisect window at any time if you have a hunch. I have done this and I'm pretty sure the manual even describes doing this. I also haven't even mentioned some of the more useful features about git bisect. For example, often times, even if you don't know exactly what the problem is, you might be able to narrow down with good certainty what set of files would've had to change to cause it. `git bisect start` accepts pathspecs after everything else. If you tell it that, it will only select commits where files in that pathspec have changed. You could of course manually find commits of interest and then divide them in half and so forth, but that really doesn't feel like it scales very well. And if all you care about is what release version something broke in, there's really no particular reason why an automated tool couldn't do that, too. I suspect the reason why `git bisect` doesn't have a "tags only" mode is because it's not what bisect is really for, though it would probably be a fairly trivial addition. I also personally never loved Git GUIs. Being able to visualize the state of the working directory/repository feels very nice, but in practice it doesn't really solve a problem for me. In practice, I always come away feeling like Git GUI tools create as many problems as they solve. The only exception is that I vastly prefer JetBrain's 3-way-merge tool over almost any other merge tool. (Runner's up would probably be kdiff3, I guess. Not a huge fan of vimdiff.)