@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:
@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
@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