4 ms·
It's just an excellent proxy of insufficient resources, nothing more. A missing feature doesn't automagically appear with time to make the ticket irrelevant. If
by eviks 3y ago
It's just an excellent proxy of insufficient resources, nothing more. A missing feature doesn't automagically appear with time to make the ticket irrelevant. If it's not relevant, it shouldn't be in the system in the first place
> when you get that notification rescue the 2 per year that you truly want to keep.
That makes even less sense. Looking at notifications and making a decision on closing/reopening is a form of review. If you have time to review, do it properly on your own schedule and in batches rather than be beholden to some arbitrary autoclose timeline with yet another focus-destroying trickle of notifictions
- IanCal 3y ago> If it's not relevant, it shouldn't be in the system in the first place It was when it was created, it's not now. And it is then practically removed. Again you can build whatever workflow you want, tag stuff or move things if they're super important to you. Subscribe to them if they're vital. Or don't auto close if that doesn't work for you. I don't think that having a tiny number of issues that are * Never looked at * Never prioritised * Never searched for * Not subscribed to by anyone that cares about them * Somehow super important to not have a "cancelled" status on them Should define your workflow to this degree that you start keeping multiple lists of work. I'm not sure I've ever come across an issue worth leaving like this. Can you tell me about an issue that fits this description?
- eviks 3y agoThat's not a proper description (why is it suddenly vital/super the only alternatives to irrelevant?), why would I look for an example that fits? > It's not now You don't know that, in the process you yourself proposed that determination was done when you get an autoclose notification