Post
-
Hot take?: Any maintainer is allowed (and also should) close any bug they don't want to fix (as in, it's a boring issue to fix) without having to state any reason at all.
Senza categoria@karolherbst Framing it as entitlement is really weird and I don't think it's helpful. Again, there's humans on both side of the fence here. A project is ideally a collaboration of people writing and maintaining and using software. The majority of people are pretty receptive to "yeah we just don't have time for that", but nobody likes an issue they spent time researching and writing to be closed without even a reason given. It often creates further issues, rather than shutting them down.
-
Hot take?: Any maintainer is allowed (and also should) close any bug they don't want to fix (as in, it's a boring issue to fix) without having to state any reason at all.
Senza categoria@karolherbst I mean project is a lot better than maintainer, but my core thing here is that it's just unnecessary to be us-vs-them here. by all means close tickets that are not actionable, or nonsense. but i think any time you close something without a reason, or just because you don't like it, as a project, that's a bad outcome for your community.
-
Hot take?: Any maintainer is allowed (and also should) close any bug they don't want to fix (as in, it's a boring issue to fix) without having to state any reason at all.
Senza categoria@karolherbst in most large projects where this is even a problem, it is not in fact "their project", it's a project built over many years through the contributions of many people. I think that's the core tricky part.
-
Hot take?: Any maintainer is allowed (and also should) close any bug they don't want to fix (as in, it's a boring issue to fix) without having to state any reason at all.
Senza categoria@karolherbst maintainers are not some kind of magical being, able to trivially determine the right course of action at a glance. i don't think encouraging people to think in such adversarial ways really helps anyone. by all means close issues that nobody's going to work on, but you gotta accept that maintainers are not the only humans in the story. this is why projects have governance mechanisms, to avoid the kinds of failures that arbitrary one-guy decision making leads to.
-
Hot take?: Any maintainer is allowed (and also should) close any bug they don't want to fix (as in, it's a boring issue to fix) without having to state any reason at all.
Senza categoria@karolherbst in my experience i absolutely do not trust maintainers to be particularly good at this. sometimes they are, sometimes they aren't. "sorry we won't have bandwidth to do this, but we'd be happy to accept contributions" is like trivial to say and covers the same. there's no reason to make things adversarial at every possible junction.
-
Hot take?: Any maintainer is allowed (and also should) close any bug they don't want to fix (as in, it's a boring issue to fix) without having to state any reason at all.
Senza categoria@karolherbst that's not actually reasonable if you're part of a project, just unnecessarily hostile to somebody who's contributing. if you're a single dev doing your own project then do whatever you like, but it's different if you're an open source project built from the collaboration of many people, including the people filing issues and using your software.