5 ms·

Regarding adding +1 to issues - rather than doing this, up-vote the issue on GitHub (thumb up). This can be useful to maintainers because they can sort by thumb

Regarding adding +1 to issues - rather than doing this, up-vote the issue on GitHub (thumb up). This can be useful to maintainers because they can sort by thumb up and see the most popular ones. Adding a +1 comment really does nothing - it's just one more useless notifications for everyone, and it won't allow filtering or sorting issues. People might even unwatch the issue because of this and thus missing useful comments.

welder 4y ago
Edit: Nevermind, we're saying the same thing since you're talking about commenting with a +1 not reactions. > Adding a +1 comment really does nothing - it's just one more useless notifications for everyone I don't think reactions trigger notification emails.
- praptak 4y ago
  It's bad either way. "Me too" should not be mixed with "I got a reliable reproduction, here's how". Edit: I mean people probably want a notification on the second one but not the first.
- dewey 4y ago
  They are talking about a literal comment saying something like "+1", which is very common. Not a thumbs up reaction.
  - welder 4y ago
    Thanks, I must have missed that.
  - ximm 4y ago
    The thumbs up was added only a few years ago. +1 is quite common in older treads.
dewey 4y ago
> This can be useful to maintainers because they can sort by thumb up and see the most popular ones. TIL, but I also think it's not really clear what a reaction does. Does adding a reaction to a comment in an issue thread bump the whole issue, does it have to be added to the top issue to show up in sorting? I think a global "Vote for this issue" button would make this a bit more clearer than just a reaction within the issue. I was always under the impression that just adding a reaction wouldn't actually give the issue a bump. Maybe it would be good if Github actually guides people towards it by either saying something like "You added a comment reflecting a +1, do you want to add a vote for the issue instead".
- laurent123456 4y ago
  > Does adding a reaction to a comment in an issue thread bump the whole issue, does it have to be added to the top issue to show up in sorting? Yes it needs to be added to the top post. It's not really an official thing I guess, but for popular projects these reactions add up, and it helps getting a clearer picture of what matters to users.
  - davidmurdoch 4y ago
    It is "official" in the sense that GitHub lets you sort by these reactions.
- icambron 4y ago
  The point here is to not bump the issue. My GitHub notifications are a mess, and bumps cause me to unsub from notifications to issues in my own repository. There’s also a 0% chance a bump is going to cause me to reallocate my evening, so it doesn’t help get the issue moved forward.
  - dewey 4y ago
    Bumping doesn't necessarily mean "sending an email to the maintainer and everyone on the issue", adding a reaction can also "bump" an issue in the sense that it bumps it to the top of the list if sorted by "thumbs up reaction".
pcthrowaway 4y ago
Perhaps I misunderstood the author, I assumed '+1' in this context meant the thumbs-up reaction. I'm certainly feeling much more charitable towards the OP if they literally meant people commenting "+1" (which is unfortunately a thing), but I think in a lot of contexts "+1", "thumbs-up", "like" are interchangable.
- kayodelycaon 4y ago
  It’s literally people commenting. There’s a subset of users that haven’t noticed or haven’t understood the reaction buttons.
- jacobtomlinson 4y ago
  OP here. Thumbs up is great, commenting with the string “+1” is not great, commenting with “Why this this not done yet, this is very important to me. I might switch to another project if you don’t implement this.” is terrible.
  - pcthrowaway 4y ago
    Totally fair, and for what it's worth I agree. When I read the original post, I thought by '+1' you just meant the thumbs up reaction
droidist2 4y ago
Then again, adding a comment may prevent a bot from auto-closing the issue.
- MereInterest 4y ago
  I've never really understood the point of these bots. I could understand if an issue had a test case attached to it, and the bot was auto-closing the issue if/when the test passes. That way, if it is resolved when fixing some other bug, or when refactoring, the issue is closed. But closing an issue due to inactivity gives the false impression that the issue has been resolved.
  - johannes1234321 4y ago
    It depends a bit in the project and maintainers motivation. However: Many projects swim in a sea of open tickets. Too many for the maintainers to keep an overview. By auto closing you make it clear to observers that currently this thing likely won't change and by forcing to reopen the maintainers can get users to tell them whether the issue still persists without having to try themselves. Generally there is little worth in keeping many years old tickets open, hiding recent issues while probably not being an issue anymore for whatever reason.
    - yorwba 4y ago
      How do old tickets hide recent issues? The default is to show the newest ones first, isn't it?
  - jlkuester7 4y ago
    Same, I find these bots really annoying. I guess they might be necessary/useful for popular projects where a small team of maintainers is trying to stay on top of a massive pile of incoming issues. But for the most part they seem misguided. (Especially the ones with a really short (like 30 days) activity window.) If an issue still exists in the project, why should it be closed? That will just require the next person who notices the issue to open a new one... Also, no activity on an issue can just mean that folks are waiting patiently for someone to get around to implementing it (or, more commonly, for some project dependency to release the patch that is necessary for fixing the issue ..).
samatman 4y ago
I agree with you, but old habits die hard. Reacts are a late addition to the GitHub interface, and in ye olde days adding a +1 comment was what you had to work with. Just something to keep in mind in encouraging contributors to use the upvote and reacts.

welder 4y ago

Edit: Nevermind, we're saying the same thing since you're talking about commenting with a +1 not reactions. > Adding a +1 comment really does nothing - it's just one more useless notifications for everyone I don't think reactions trigger notification emails.

praptak 4y ago
It's bad either way. "Me too" should not be mixed with "I got a reliable reproduction, here's how". Edit: I mean people probably want a notification on the second one but not the first.
dewey 4y ago
They are talking about a literal comment saying something like "+1", which is very common. Not a thumbs up reaction.
- welder 4y ago
  Thanks, I must have missed that.
- ximm 4y ago
  The thumbs up was added only a few years ago. +1 is quite common in older treads.

dewey 4y ago

> This can be useful to maintainers because they can sort by thumb up and see the most popular ones. TIL, but I also think it's not really clear what a reaction does. Does adding a reaction to a comment in an issue thread bump the whole issue, does it have to be added to the top issue to show up in sorting? I think a global "Vote for this issue" button would make this a bit more clearer than just a reaction within the issue. I was always under the impression that just adding a reaction wouldn't actually give the issue a bump. Maybe it would be good if Github actually guides people towards it by either saying something like "You added a comment reflecting a +1, do you want to add a vote for the issue instead".

laurent123456 4y ago
> Does adding a reaction to a comment in an issue thread bump the whole issue, does it have to be added to the top issue to show up in sorting? Yes it needs to be added to the top post. It's not really an official thing I guess, but for popular projects these reactions add up, and it helps getting a clearer picture of what matters to users.
- davidmurdoch 4y ago
  It is "official" in the sense that GitHub lets you sort by these reactions.
icambron 4y ago
The point here is to not bump the issue. My GitHub notifications are a mess, and bumps cause me to unsub from notifications to issues in my own repository. There’s also a 0% chance a bump is going to cause me to reallocate my evening, so it doesn’t help get the issue moved forward.
- dewey 4y ago
  Bumping doesn't necessarily mean "sending an email to the maintainer and everyone on the issue", adding a reaction can also "bump" an issue in the sense that it bumps it to the top of the list if sorted by "thumbs up reaction".

pcthrowaway 4y ago

Perhaps I misunderstood the author, I assumed '+1' in this context meant the thumbs-up reaction. I'm certainly feeling much more charitable towards the OP if they literally meant people commenting "+1" (which is unfortunately a thing), but I think in a lot of contexts "+1", "thumbs-up", "like" are interchangable.

kayodelycaon 4y ago
It’s literally people commenting. There’s a subset of users that haven’t noticed or haven’t understood the reaction buttons.
jacobtomlinson 4y ago
OP here. Thumbs up is great, commenting with the string “+1” is not great, commenting with “Why this this not done yet, this is very important to me. I might switch to another project if you don’t implement this.” is terrible.
- pcthrowaway 4y ago
  Totally fair, and for what it's worth I agree. When I read the original post, I thought by '+1' you just meant the thumbs up reaction

droidist2 4y ago

Then again, adding a comment may prevent a bot from auto-closing the issue.

MereInterest 4y ago
I've never really understood the point of these bots. I could understand if an issue had a test case attached to it, and the bot was auto-closing the issue if/when the test passes. That way, if it is resolved when fixing some other bug, or when refactoring, the issue is closed. But closing an issue due to inactivity gives the false impression that the issue has been resolved.
- johannes1234321 4y ago
  It depends a bit in the project and maintainers motivation. However: Many projects swim in a sea of open tickets. Too many for the maintainers to keep an overview. By auto closing you make it clear to observers that currently this thing likely won't change and by forcing to reopen the maintainers can get users to tell them whether the issue still persists without having to try themselves. Generally there is little worth in keeping many years old tickets open, hiding recent issues while probably not being an issue anymore for whatever reason.
  - yorwba 4y ago
    How do old tickets hide recent issues? The default is to show the newest ones first, isn't it?
- jlkuester7 4y ago
  Same, I find these bots really annoying. I guess they might be necessary/useful for popular projects where a small team of maintainers is trying to stay on top of a massive pile of incoming issues. But for the most part they seem misguided. (Especially the ones with a really short (like 30 days) activity window.) If an issue still exists in the project, why should it be closed? That will just require the next person who notices the issue to open a new one... Also, no activity on an issue can just mean that folks are waiting patiently for someone to get around to implementing it (or, more commonly, for some project dependency to release the patch that is necessary for fixing the issue ..).

samatman 4y ago

I agree with you, but old habits die hard. Reacts are a late addition to the GitHub interface, and in ye olde days adding a +1 comment was what you had to work with. Just something to keep in mind in encouraging contributors to use the upvote and reacts.