54 ms·

You can give people permission to triage and close issues.

toast0 4y ago
Sure, but that's more work. Managing people is work. Coordinating about the project is more work. At the end, that person is still on the hook to close issues that aren't going to be worked on, but maybe they want to check first, or maybe they get drawn into an argument about the issue.
- matkoniecz 4y ago
  In such case letting issues pile up or closing issue tracker altogether is fine if owner is not interested in processing issues. stalebot achieves the same effect, and irritates all people interacting with it
  - kelnos 4y ago
    > In such case letting issues pile up or closing issue tracker altogether is fine if owner is not interested in processing issues. That's so black-and-white. Perhaps the owner is interested in processing issues, but not all of them. That seems to be the more common case. Closing the issue tracker would not be useful. And letting issues pile up can be stressful for a maintainer. > stalebot achieves the same effect No it doesn't. It allows a maintainer to avoid having to manage issues that they probably won't get to, while allowing them to manage the issues they are actively working on, or plan to work on. and irritates all people interacting with it Tough shit. Random people on the internet are not entitled to any particular level of support, or issue resolution policy from the maintainer.
    - matkoniecz 4y ago
      > Tough shit. Random people on the internet are not entitled to any particular level of support, or issue resolution policy from the maintainer. Oh, definitely. I am not a God-Emperor of issue tracking. And projects adding stale-bot are unlikely to actually need my support/issues/donations/anything else. Though I hope that projects will find other less hostile solutions.
cxr 4y ago
This presumes a thoughtful and deliberate approach, where all decisions and other actions related to bug management come from a place of wisdom and care, but that filters out pretty much any project that's using GitHub Issues to track bugs. The kind of thought that goes into choosing GitHub for projects' bugtrackers is about the same level of thought that went into the decisions of anyone who was using Internet Explorer 10 years ago: they didn't think about it a lot, nor did they particularly care—they just picked it because it was there.
- matkoniecz 4y ago
  not always, GitHub issue tracker is actually my favourite one and I used multiple ones

Sure, but that's more work. Managing people is work. Coordinating about the project is more work. At the end, that person is still on the hook to close issues that aren't going to be worked on, but maybe they want to check first, or maybe they get drawn into an argument about the issue.

matkoniecz 4y ago
In such case letting issues pile up or closing issue tracker altogether is fine if owner is not interested in processing issues. stalebot achieves the same effect, and irritates all people interacting with it
- kelnos 4y ago
  > In such case letting issues pile up or closing issue tracker altogether is fine if owner is not interested in processing issues. That's so black-and-white. Perhaps the owner is interested in processing issues, but not all of them. That seems to be the more common case. Closing the issue tracker would not be useful. And letting issues pile up can be stressful for a maintainer. > stalebot achieves the same effect No it doesn't. It allows a maintainer to avoid having to manage issues that they probably won't get to, while allowing them to manage the issues they are actively working on, or plan to work on. and irritates all people interacting with it Tough shit. Random people on the internet are not entitled to any particular level of support, or issue resolution policy from the maintainer.
  - matkoniecz 4y ago
    > Tough shit. Random people on the internet are not entitled to any particular level of support, or issue resolution policy from the maintainer. Oh, definitely. I am not a God-Emperor of issue tracking. And projects adding stale-bot are unlikely to actually need my support/issues/donations/anything else. Though I hope that projects will find other less hostile solutions.

cxr 4y ago

This presumes a thoughtful and deliberate approach, where all decisions and other actions related to bug management come from a place of wisdom and care, but that filters out pretty much any project that's using GitHub Issues to track bugs. The kind of thought that goes into choosing GitHub for projects' bugtrackers is about the same level of thought that went into the decisions of anyone who was using Internet Explorer 10 years ago: they didn't think about it a lot, nor did they particularly care—they just picked it because it was there.

matkoniecz 4y ago
not always, GitHub issue tracker is actually my favourite one and I used multiple ones