Pet peeve: People complaining about the way I maintain my open source projects under MIT license (particularly my decision to use stale bot, since I don't like seeing literal thousands of open issues across my repos).
Just fork it! No skin off my back. https://www.jeffgeerling.com/blog/2022/just-say-no
@geerlingguy There is a distinct difference between a timeout based stale bot and saying no to an issue. With the former you ensure I will probably never contribute to your things again, with the latter I am still happy to help
From a fellow opensource maintainer and contributor.
@darix fine by me!
I often post a PR to a project with zero expectations whatsoever.
The only reason I post it is so (a) I can incorporate that into my own documentation or fork, and (b) so others who use the project can benefit.
If anyone on the project ever decides to merge my code, that's just icing on the cake.
That's why you should have some sort of "work in progress" flag/tag/state. There's a difference between an issue being worked on without being updated and an issue being ignored/not worked on.
Ideally, you'd put the issue id in the commit message, so it's clear what's going on.
But I have to admit, splitting discussing an issue and working on an issue into two different places is not ideal.
@AdmSnackbar @darix my stale bot configuration has a pass for bug and "planned" labels.
But I apply those labels sparingly. I don't close bugs, but I often close feature requests. The projects are first and foremost for me, if others benefit from my code that's great.
Jeff Geerling
darix
Admiral Snackbär