3 ms·

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 eff

• 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.