Skip to content
This repository was archived by the owner on Nov 18, 2021. It is now read-only.

closing issue situations #1510

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from
Open

closing issue situations #1510

Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
1 commit
Select commit
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
9 changes: 7 additions & 2 deletions README.md
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -26,8 +26,13 @@ users can know what their official response was.
Send GitHub the issue URL at the end of the message so that they can
more easily find updates and further comments here.

Issues will only be closed once GitHub implements / fixes them,
or explicitly says WONTFIX, which almost never happens nowadays.
Issues will only be closed in one of the following situations:
- once GitHub implements / fixes it
- GitHub explicitly says it's a WONTFIX, which almost never happens nowadays
Copy link
Collaborator

@clarkbw clarkbw Mar 15, 2019

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This certainly almost never happens. However it's also an extremely difficult task. I can't say for certainty that GitHub will never implement a given request. A system that was more flexible would be more possible to work within. For example I could much more easily mark an issue unlikely which may translate to wontfix for some but for myself more accurately represents the situation. At this point in time I can make a call about many features but that won't hold true forever.

I'm not trying to nitpick with semantics here but allow a way for me to represent what I know accurately.

Copy link
Collaborator

@TPS TPS Mar 15, 2019

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@clarkbw I think you're saying that very few issues will be closed if not implemented, which actually, basically is a rule of thumb here currently (IMHO). I also think I understand that you'd like to implement #472, @ least for this repo & those like it, for such otherwise open issues. 🙇

Copy link
Collaborator

@clarkbw clarkbw Mar 15, 2019

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I also think I understand that you'd like to implement #472, @ least for this repo & those like it, for such otherwise open issues. 🙇

Wait, what? Are you reading my GitHub emails? 😄

That's likely an ideal solution to this problem. Might be nice if I could set a "GitHub priority" and there could also be a "Community Priority" that wasn't set by me.

Copy link
Collaborator

@TPS TPS Mar 15, 2019

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Until y'all do have #472 officially accomplished, such could be kludged in via abusing Milestones or even more Labels, I suppose? 🤷🏾‍♂️

- it's a duplicate of another issue
- it contains a lot of abusive content

However if an issue is just a stupid feature, it will likely get many 👎but it can be still opened.
Copy link
Contributor

@sypets sypets Mar 11, 2019 •
edited
Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I think this patch makes sense. Except for this sentence:

However if an issue is just a stupid feature, it will likely get many 👎but it can be still opened.

I would entirely drop it. Why?

  1. Even mentioning the question if something is "stupid" will likely just open up a can of worms of useless debates.
  2. The 4 rules already clearly state what is to be closed and what is not.

If you do keep it, I would suggest:

If an issue is not considered a useful feature, it will likely get many downvotes by 👎, but it will not get closed.

(added comma after thumbsdown, used different wording for "stupid" and changed "can be still opened" to "not get closed" because an issue will get opened in any case, so I found that was misleading)

Disclaimer: I am not a maintainer here or native English speaker, it's just my opinion.

Copy link
Collaborator

@TPS TPS Mar 11, 2019

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I agree this needs reworded to be less offensive, but the clarification should remain, as stupidity is often more controversial than abuse. 🤷‍♂️

Issues may take a long time (forever) to be fixed, so make sure that
you are ready to keep them around on your [/issues](https://github.com/issues)
list for a long time.
Expand Down