✧✦Catherine✦✧monthly routine ^_^
Sebastian Cohnen@whitequark while I can personally understand the urge to "clean stuff up”, I wholeheartedly agree that these stale bots are just the worst.
@tisba being rude while saying "a friendly reminder" is really the thing that makes it insulting
@whitequark absolutely! Especially if it's fully automated. I can understand when from time to time somebody looks through old issues and tries to triage if the issue is still valid, or asking for some new information etc.
@tisba yeah manual triage is 100% fair game
@tisba even siccing copilot on the issue would have been less insulting than a flat 30 day timeout ffs
@whitequark 30 days is extra insulting, if you ask me.
Gwen the Loitering Fox 
@whitequark @tisba what I hate the most is that this is a reminder to whoever created the issue that "we haven't done anything about it in 30 days"
stale bots should be used to remind maintainers, not users, to keep up activity. Ideally a stalebot message should be:
Matthias Mair@gwenthefops @tisba @whitequark that depends on your view of what is “owed” ppl that use software that was published for free.
I noticed the last few years that more and more users seem to just snipe 3 half baked ideas into feature requests and fck off to never be seen again or answer any questions. If an issue has no one assigned to be responsible and no movement the bot closes it after 30 days. Anyone mad about it can get them self assigned
@matmair @tisba @whitequark if it is a feature request, especially half baked, then all it takes is a single maintainer to go "we're not gonna work on that" with an optional "but you're welcome to submit something"
And in that case, instead of auto-closing, the maintainer is reminded that they gave time for the user to do something about it, thye didn't, just close.
Tiny bit more work (that I as a maintainer of an open source project would gladly do, if our project had a stalebot) for a much better feeling for the user
And in that case, instead of auto-closing, the maintainer is reminded that they gave time for the user to do something about it, thye didn't, just close.
Tiny bit more work (that I as a maintainer of an open source project would gladly do, if our project had a stalebot) for a much better feeling for the user
@whitequark @gwenthefops @tisba that seems like a very unkind thing to say without knowing anything about me.
But matches with the stuff others have started asserting about me from 1 sentence here. I see non-conformance is not wanted in your follower ship.
@matmair @gwenthefops @tisba open source is a collaborative enterprise. if you don't respect my time why should i respect yours? and if you insult me, why should i tolerate that?
@whitequark @gwenthefops @tisba I really do not see how a stale bot is an insult.
The example posted is an unfortunate case; at most after the second message / reaction cycle someone should deactivate the bot for that issue.
The cases that I try to solve are like this one: https://github.com/inventree/InvenTree/issues/9998 there is a question back and then just silence from OP. I spend 20-30 hrs a week co-maintaining that project for 5 years now.
@whitequark @gwenthefops @tisba we have tried to onboard ppl to help triage; no one seems to want to help. At one point we had over 200 issues that were awaiting feedback; it was not possible to determine which bug was real and which was a deployment problem/already solved.
If you have soltutions that are better I am all ears. Going through alle issues every few weeks and nagging for feedback took hours and was deeply demoralizing.
2/2
@matmair @gwenthefops @tisba this is not an "unfortunate case", this is how the stale bot is normally deployed. and if you don't see how auto-closing an issue I could have spent hours or days debugging is an insult and a gravely disrespectful way to treat my time I don't think we have much to discuss
Billy O'Neal@whitequark @tisba Agreed. Any system calling *itself* friendly is almost always not.