61–70 of 320 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No, you can always summarize details neatly at the top, you can edit comments, you know?
Yes but the person who is qualified to summarize might not be the person who initiated a discussion.
> 80-90% of what users think are bugs are either misunderstandings, environmental problems, or configuration errors by the users themselves. For what's left, the majority are often feature requests (unimplemented features) and not bugs (malfunctioning features). Do I ever make mistakes? No. It’s the users who are wrong.
The real miss here is that there isn't a way on GitHub to only allow maintainers to create issues, instead we are left with these subpar workarounds.
[1]: https://github.com/LGUG2Z/komorebi/blob/master/.github/workf...
> This pattern makes it easier for maintainers or contributors to find issues to work on since every issue is ready to be worked on. How is this not trivially solved via a "ready-to-be-worked-on" tag?
Compared to that, this system has been a huge success. It has its own problems, but it's directionally better.
100% agree. If it's someone else's project, they have full authority to decide what is and isn't an issue. With large enough projects, you're going to have enough bad actors, people who don't read error messages, and just downright crazy people. Throw in people using AI for dubious purposes like CVE inflation, and it's even worse.
Yeah but a good issue tracker should be able to help you filter that stuff out. That ghostty finds discussions to be a better way to triage user requests/issues is somewhat quirky, although a perfectly valid option. As is just using issues, imo. Just good to make sure users know how to report an issue, and what information to include.
> Yeah but a good issue tracker should be able to help you filter that stuff out.
Agreed. This highlights GitHub's issue management system being inadequate.
(Note: I'm the creator/lead of Ghostty)
100% agree. If it's someone else's project, they have full authority to decide what is and isn't an issue. With large enough projects, you're going to have enough bad actors, people who don't read error messages, and just downright crazy people. Throw in people using AI for dubious purposes like CVE inflation, and it's even worse.
Is this fundamentally different than just using tags on issues to separate ready to work on things from initial user submissions?
Whereas if it goes via a Discussion first, the back and forth happens elsewhere.
Arguably an separate issue could still do this, but it being a discussion sets the expectation better.
But, I am super lazy.