4 ms·
A won't fix might make sense if the issue is a feature request that goes against the program philosophy. In that case forking the repo makes more sense. I whol
by yoz-y 6y ago
A won't fix might make sense if the issue is a feature request that goes against the program philosophy. In that case forking the repo makes more sense.
I wholeheartedly agree that closing issues just because they are old is a terrible practice. It's also why I have stopped sending radars. No point of doing work for somebody else if it just generates even more work for me.
- pas 6y agoI have no problem with closing them for bugs, because in a few major versions usually the software changes sufficiently to have a good chance of that original bug report simply being obsolete (not reproducible, log/debug output not useful anymore, architecture changes, GUI changes, client software/driver changes, kernel changes, etc.) But in case of a feature request, where the project maintainer agreed it's a long term goal, a bot closing it is just noise, which IMHO discourages useful/insightful comments.
- yoz-y 6y agoI don't think it's justified for bugs either. At least it should be opt-in per bug. It can hide especially sinister bugs that happen only in an uncommon case. This assumes a list of bugs that are actually reproductible bugs not an unfiltered feedback from the clients.