Please review your use of stale bot
Closed this issue · 4 comments
At the time of writing this project has has 47 issues raised. 23 of them have been closed by the stale bot.
This might keep your open issues down, but I think its a bad decision.
Issues raised are contributions, even if they arent actually improvements - they are suggestions as to how the project could be improved.
They are an indication to other people that an improvement has been suggested and they can indicate that they also want this enhancement or even actually work on it.
OK, so you probably dont want the ~600 open issues that we have on https://github.com/zaproxy/zaproxy/issues ;) We do close stale issues, but its a manual process and its much more conservative (possibly too conservative). But that means that we do have bugs that are fixed after 2 years (eg zaproxy/zaproxy#765) - I'd much rather have this than have a bug or feature request forgotten about.
I think that the aggressive closing of issues sends a signal that enhancement requests are not really valued.
I'm expecting this issue to be closed by stale bot :P
Thanks for the feedback :) I've added this bot, after I saw it on other repositories (I think Kuberenetes). I think it help us focus - the project was a bit less active, and I felt that some of the issue was irrelevant. Maybe we should just add the stale label but not closing them - what do you think? It could help us focus on the issues that relevant.
Another option is, like what you suggested - don't affraid from many open issues. Not sure what option is better here, and I'm new to all this world of mainataining open source project.
Relevence is a matter of prespective as @psiinon mentioned an issue opened 2 years back was useful and relevent for someone and hence fixed.
I for example keep a larger list of open issues even if i intend not to fix them as a reference for others so that if someone wants to contribute they can have a look at how things are and where they can contribute. Instead of closing issues coz of lack of conversation marking them inactive would be better. However more better approach would be to spend a few minutes to look at the issues decide its worth spending time or or not and then mark accordingly as wont-fix not-priority bug enhancement good-first-issue etc. but more importantly add the reasoning if then you want to close issue has reached its eol and can be closed respectfully.
As @psiinon mentioned issues are generally the only way to communicate with author's in public and are generally useful for other users also as a way to find solutions for the problems.
@omerlh Thank you, stale bot autoclosing unresolved and in many cases un-commented issues is a rising repository smell these days...