search

HopkinsIDD / flepiMoP

The Flexible Epidemic Modeling Pipeline
https://flepimop.org
GNU General Public License v3.0
9 stars 4 forks source link

Removing the auto-labeler for issue tags, priority levels in our issue templates #327

Closed emprzy closed 1 month ago

emprzy commented 1 month ago

Describe your changes.

In this pull request I deleted the YAML file that configured the auto-labeler for issue tags and priority levels, as well as the dropdowns within the actual issue templates where users select labels and priority.

What does your pull request address? Tag relevant issues.

This pull request addresses GH-319. Since we determined that the auto-labeler was problematic, it's getting the boot! Also mentioned in this issue are the actual issue tags themselves. I can't make a pull request for the changes I'm going to make to those (because issue labels only exist at the repo level). But I will be deleting three of the tags (help wanted, invalid, question, revisit ASAP), and making definitions a little bit more clear for a couple others.

Thanks y'all!

TimothyWillard commented 1 month ago

I'm glad the auto-labeler is getting the boot, but why are the label/priority drop downs being removed as well? I like them because they strongly encourage issue reporters to tag their issues in a way that makes them quick to get context and sort on.

emprzy commented 1 month ago

I'm glad the auto-labeler is getting the boot, but why are the label/priority drop downs being removed as well? I like them because they strongly encourage issue reporters to tag their issues in a way that makes them quick to get context and sort on.

Oh I see. I was under the impression you were anti the drop downs because they were a bit redundant, but I agree that they offer a (positive) certain degree of mandatory-ness to labeling issues, even if selecting from the drop down doesn't actually label the issue as such.

I'll bring them back and update them!

emprzy commented 1 month ago

This is ready to be merged, if you approve @TimothyWillard @jcblemai

emprzy commented 1 month ago

My concerns are addressed here so I'll go ahead and approve. However, not sure if this line of questioning was resolved: #327 (comment). @jcblemai Do you have a preference for adding all of the package specific tags in this PR or in a followup? Might be best to add the R package specific tags with a r- prefix so r-flepiconfig, r-flepicommon, and r-inference?

Oh, this is a good question indded

emprzy commented 1 month ago

Would love to get this merged ASAP to fix the issue/PR templates. The conversation surrounding what labels we have can be ongoing and dynamic, independent of this.