Qubes OS Github Issues recent changes and developments

There has been some recent development for the existing issues on Qubes OS primary issue tracking qubes-issues repository.

  1. All issues with r4.1 tag are closed by bot (details here). This reduced the number of open issues to ~1700 (from ~2100). If you have had any favorite issue which is still valid for the current supported release which is automatically closed, you could comment on it to be reopened.
  2. In addition to labels, a type is assigned to each issue (bug, feature, task, no type). Unfortunately the “Last Updated” time for each issue is also changed by this operation and all issues are re-reshuffled. This is a minor annoyance as sorting by “Last Updated” is meaningless at this moment. If the bot had done this sequentially (instead of by each label), the “Last Update” status should have been preserved.
8 Likes

Sorry, that was me, not a bot. I’m not aware of a way to program a bot to do it sequentially, which is why I’ve just been doing it manually. :frowning:

If anyone knows if this is possible, please let me know (at least for future reference).

I plan to delete the “type” labels once they’re completely redundant.

3 Likes

As commented on GitHub, I find this action particularly inappropriate for reasons like:

  1. Bug reporters have already spent time finding, describing and submitting the bug reports. Just because nobody paid attention to particular issue, does not justify automatically/mechanistically marking it as closed with a “Not planned” label, thus discarding and ignoring completely what was already done by the reporter and requiring from him/her to spend again the time time on the same issue. It is simply inefficient and does not stimulate reporting new bugs.

  2. It is also unfair and disrespectful. Bug reporting is done for free, not even for donations and very small percent of users actually do it.

  3. Self-purposed “cleaning” of bugs just to reduce their number is not helpful. Discarding valid bug reports does not solve them. It is bad for the quality of software and for the whole project.

Please reconsider the approach.

1 Like