5 ms·

> Author must not have worked in enterprise software before. Or with open source projects. Fucking stalebot.

by masklinn 7mo ago

IshKebab 7mo ago
Fuck stalebot.
- monster_truck 7mo ago
  All my homies hate stalebot
- tkfoss 7mo ago
  What about OSS weekend ?
bmitc 7mo ago
Take a look at Anthropic's repo. They auto-close issues after just a few weeks. I don't think I've seen an issue of theirs that wasn't auto-closed.
- tchalla 7mo ago
  Wait, isn’t software engineering a solved problem?
  - vpShane 7mo ago
    Yes
  - what 7mo ago
    Yes, that’s why they have such great up time. They don’t go down multiple times per day.
- no-name-here 7mo ago
  I just randomly plugged in numbers to look up random Claude issues on github, and out of the 20 I checked, only one was closed as fixed. :-(
afdbcreid 7mo ago
As an open source maintainer, I feel that statement is really unfair. Yes, we do sometimes close bug reports without evidence they are fixed. But: - We owe you nothing! And the fact that people still expect maintainers to work for them is really sad, IMHO. - Unlike corporate workers, nobody is measuring our productivity therefore we have no incentive to close issues if we believe they are unfixed. That means that when we close the issue, we believe it has a high chance of being fixed, and also we weigh the cost of having many maybe-fixed open issues against maybe closing a standing issue, and (try to) choose what's best for the project.
- NetMageSCW 7mo ago
  Why do you close the issue then?
  - eleumik 7mo ago
    Because open source is corporate now
  - afdbcreid 7mo ago
    Because I have a reason to believe it's fixed, I have many more like it and it's difficult to reproduce. Simple :)
    - saagarjha 7mo ago
      You have no evidence that it's fixed, but you have reason to believe it's fixed?
    - alickz 7mo ago
      >Because I have a reason to believe it's fixed What reason?
- xmprt 7mo ago
  > That means that when we close the issue, we believe it has a high chance of being fixed I agree with this iff it's being done manually after reading the issue. stalebot is indiscriminate and as far as "owing" the user, that's fair, but I'd assume that the person reporting the bug is also doing you a favor by helping you make things more stable and contributing to your repo/tool's community.
MiddleEndian 7mo ago
Or even non-software tickets at large corporations. I reported a water dispenser filling too slowly at my office because it took me a few tries just to fill my 1L water bottle. They said it was fixed and closed it. It was not fixed. So I took a video of myself refilling my water bottle, attached it to the ticket, and re-opened it. They actually fixed it after that. The video was 2m12s long (and I spent god knows how long making the video file small enough to attach to the ticket lol)
- fendy3002 7mo ago
  this is actually a good example of how a more detailed issue will have a higher chance to be addressed. I don't know what information that's your previous report is lacking, but the video certainly give more information that the maintainer can pinpoint the cause and act on it. The ability to pinpoint the cause from the report is a godsent for maintainers, it drastically reduce the time to investigate the cause, thus able to act immediately. Some of the information in this can may be: * how "slow" exactly the process is related with normal behavior. If it's just said "slow" on previous report, it's easy to be dismissed * the dispenser's behavior, such as if the water flow is consistently low volume or clogged intermittently, or if the dispenser is struggling to fetch from water source, etc
  - MiddleEndian 7mo ago
    I'd say it was both. I gave a pretty detailed explanation before, far more detailed than my post here, including a timeline of when it filled in one shot, then two shots, and then three or four (can't remember). I doubt they actually checked before the video. But I was very motivated to fix the issue so I gave them proof lol
  - account42 7mo ago
    More importantly it shows how the reporter actually used the system to trigger the undesired behavior. Just because something is obvious to you doesn't mean it will be obvious to whoever is looking at the bug report.

> Author must not have worked in enterprise software before. Or with open source projects. Fucking stalebot.

IshKebab 7mo ago

Fuck stalebot.

monster_truck 7mo ago
All my homies hate stalebot
tkfoss 7mo ago
What about OSS weekend ?

bmitc 7mo ago

Take a look at Anthropic's repo. They auto-close issues after just a few weeks. I don't think I've seen an issue of theirs that wasn't auto-closed.

tchalla 7mo ago
Wait, isn’t software engineering a solved problem?
- vpShane 7mo ago
  Yes
- what 7mo ago
  Yes, that’s why they have such great up time. They don’t go down multiple times per day.
no-name-here 7mo ago
I just randomly plugged in numbers to look up random Claude issues on github, and out of the 20 I checked, only one was closed as fixed. :-(

afdbcreid 7mo ago

As an open source maintainer, I feel that statement is really unfair. Yes, we do sometimes close bug reports without evidence they are fixed. But: - We owe you nothing! And the fact that people still expect maintainers to work for them is really sad, IMHO. - Unlike corporate workers, nobody is measuring our productivity therefore we have no incentive to close issues if we believe they are unfixed. That means that when we close the issue, we believe it has a high chance of being fixed, and also we weigh the cost of having many maybe-fixed open issues against maybe closing a standing issue, and (try to) choose what's best for the project.

NetMageSCW 7mo ago
Why do you close the issue then?
- eleumik 7mo ago
  Because open source is corporate now
- afdbcreid 7mo ago
  Because I have a reason to believe it's fixed, I have many more like it and it's difficult to reproduce. Simple :)
  - saagarjha 7mo ago
    You have no evidence that it's fixed, but you have reason to believe it's fixed?
  - alickz 7mo ago
    >Because I have a reason to believe it's fixed What reason?
xmprt 7mo ago
> That means that when we close the issue, we believe it has a high chance of being fixed I agree with this iff it's being done manually after reading the issue. stalebot is indiscriminate and as far as "owing" the user, that's fair, but I'd assume that the person reporting the bug is also doing you a favor by helping you make things more stable and contributing to your repo/tool's community.

MiddleEndian 7mo ago

Or even non-software tickets at large corporations. I reported a water dispenser filling too slowly at my office because it took me a few tries just to fill my 1L water bottle. They said it was fixed and closed it. It was not fixed. So I took a video of myself refilling my water bottle, attached it to the ticket, and re-opened it. They actually fixed it after that. The video was 2m12s long (and I spent god knows how long making the video file small enough to attach to the ticket lol)

fendy3002 7mo ago
this is actually a good example of how a more detailed issue will have a higher chance to be addressed. I don't know what information that's your previous report is lacking, but the video certainly give more information that the maintainer can pinpoint the cause and act on it. The ability to pinpoint the cause from the report is a godsent for maintainers, it drastically reduce the time to investigate the cause, thus able to act immediately. Some of the information in this can may be: * how "slow" exactly the process is related with normal behavior. If it's just said "slow" on previous report, it's easy to be dismissed * the dispenser's behavior, such as if the water flow is consistently low volume or clogged intermittently, or if the dispenser is struggling to fetch from water source, etc
- MiddleEndian 7mo ago
  I'd say it was both. I gave a pretty detailed explanation before, far more detailed than my post here, including a timeline of when it filled in one shot, then two shots, and then three or four (can't remember). I doubt they actually checked before the video. But I was very motivated to fix the issue so I gave them proof lol
- account42 7mo ago
  More importantly it shows how the reporter actually used the system to trigger the undesired behavior. Just because something is obvious to you doesn't mean it will be obvious to whoever is looking at the bug report.