Maarten Lankhorst <m.b.lankho...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 23-05-10 01:57, Dan Kegel wrote: > > I think it's a good idea. 'regression' isn't as strong as 'bisected'. > > > > Unless there are objections, I'll add the keyword on Monday. > > > I think I'll object. I don't see any point in the bisected tag that > regression doesn't already cover. As far as I know as soon as you tag > something as regression you either already have bisected it, or will be > asked to bisect it quickly after adding the regression tag.
Exactly. There shouldn't be not bisected bugs with the 'regression' keyword in the first place. -- Dmitry.
