docs: say how claiming an issue actually works - #1127
Merged
Conversation
Two first-time contributors worked on the same issue this week and one of them had been told in the thread that it was theirs. That is the fourth time, and the cause is that nothing in the repository explains how this works. CONTRIBUTING says to comment on an issue but not whether that reserves anything, and neither issue template mentions it at all, so the expectation gets set by whatever a maintainer happens to say in a thread. CONTRIBUTING now says that commenting is a courtesy so other people can see, not a reservation, and that the first working pull request is the one that lands. It also says that whoever gets there second is still credited in the release notes for reporting or diagnosing, which is already what happens. Both issue templates get the same line in the footer. The first-timers wording moves into its own template. It previously opened "This issue is reserved for first-time contributors", which means reserved for that group but reads as claimable by an individual, and that reading is what set the expectation in the first place. Having it in a template also means it stops being retyped by hand each time. None of this says anything about assignment. Issues are assigned to the maintainer and to several existing contributors, so a blanket statement about not assigning would be contradicted by what people can see. Closes #1126
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Two first-time contributors worked on the same issue (#1088) this week, and one of them had been told in the thread that it was theirs. That is the fourth time it has happened, and the cause is that nothing in the repository explains how any of this works.
CONTRIBUTING.mdsays to comment on an issue but not whether that reserves anything, and neither issue template mentions it at all. So the expectation gets set by whatever a maintainer happens to say in a thread, which is not something that can be applied consistently.What changed
CONTRIBUTING.mdnow says that commenting is a courtesy so other people can see, not a reservation, and that the first working pull request is the one that lands. It also says that whoever gets there second is still credited in the release notes for reporting or diagnosing, which is already what happens.Both issue templates get the same line in the footer.
The first-timers wording moves into its own template. It previously opened "This issue is reserved for first-time contributors", which means reserved for that group but reads as claimable by an individual, and that reading is what set the expectation in the first place. Having it in a template also means it stops being retyped by hand every time, and makes the labels consistent.
Deliberately not included
Nothing here says anything about assignment. Issues are assigned to the maintainer and to several existing community contributors, so a blanket statement about not assigning would be contradicted by what people can see, and a document the repository contradicts is worse than no document.
Closes #1126