I may have (a lot) more than 20 issues assigned to me, and would like more insight

[cdata]

The Problem

If I have more than 20 issues assigned to me (IRL I totally do), I don't know how many total issues are assigned to me. The issues list only shows 20 issues.

Depending on how you use the issues list, it may be considered a feature that it is limited to 20 issues. However, if you are interacting with issues that do not appear on the top 20 list, you may not be able to get an at-a-glance update for their status.

On a basic dopamine-tweaking level, if I close an issue only to discover that the daunting list of 20 has not gotten any smaller, I don't get as much satisfaction from the act of doing an otherwise good thing.

Expected Behavior

It may be satisfactory to offer some kind of optional filter that hides any issues that don't require action from the person viewing the list.

It might also be nice to show a number representing the number of issues beyond the first 20 that are assigned. E.g., some text that reads "...and 327 more issues" at the bottom of the list or something.

Other thoughts

🙏 for me.

[samuelli]

It may be satisfactory to offer some kind of optional filter that hides any issues that don't require action from the person viewing the list.

FWIW, we make the assumption that all your assigned issues require your attention.

"...and 327 more issues" at the bottom of the list or something.

Unintentional at this stage, but I am also generally exploring the notion that large lists are daunting and we want to avoid this. Generally, the idea isn't just close as many bugs as you possibly can, but rather keep up with the rate of incoming bugs and you have yourself a really healthy project. I think I'll want to continue exploring this by introducing small, achievable goalposts. eg. telling you how many issues you need to close this week and how many you already have this week.

[cdata]

we make the assumption that all your assigned issues require your attention.

Consider this: I may be awaiting further clarification from the issue filer, or a PR (mine or someone else's) that is in progress related to the issue. In both of these cases, the issue is lower priority than those that I have not responded to at all.

Generally, the idea isn't just close as many bugs as you possibly can, but rather keep up with the rate of incoming bugs and you have yourself a really healthy project.

I would like to suggest that an ordered list of all issues is actually not going to serve your stated goal very well. If you consider my case, for example, the issues I see in the list:

• All come from the same source project
• Are all very old
• Are incidentally low priority compared to most of the other issues I have

All this tells me right now is that I am neck deep in issue debt and if I want "inbox zero" I need to start resolving issues en masse ASAP.

One potential alternative to this approach would be to identify issues where a certain value metric is quite high and show a short list (maybe 3 - 5) of these issues to the user each day. For example, if there was some ratio of issueValue / issueDifficulty, you could sort by that and show the top three every day. As the issues close, you do not populate the list with more issues. Instead, the list repopulates at the beginning of the next day.

[samuelli]

awaiting further clarification from the issue filer

We're adding a 'needs-feedback' bot which should address this case in particular.

If you consider my case

The odd part is that I don't think you have a typical list and/or a normal looking list we expect to see long-term.

serve your stated goal

I was more talking about project level issues. I'm still treating assigned as a strong signal, which is why its in your dashboard at all. Project pages will show short lists. Prioritising is really difficult, because we have very little information to work off right now. The plan is to introduce top level priorities (P0, P1), which should at least bubble certain issues to the top.

Instead, the list repopulates at the beginning of the next day.

I like - but probably not happening for assigned issues. It's basically a TODO list, so I want to avoid magic there. We'll also expose some other information for issues (see mocks) which may also help with rough prioritization. Perhaps other ordering features might help - group by repo etc.

[cdata]

Well, in that case my original request stands: I would really like to know (at the least) how big the iceberg is. Even better would be some way to pare down the list without necessarily closing the issue.

And to clarify why I am asking for a way to pare down the list: a big barrier to moving forward with any issues (for me) is that there is a high time commitment cost to engaging on any one issue. The dialogue latency is volatile and often quite high. It would be very helpful if the time commitment could be broken down into shorter intervals. If "lower priority" issues were hidden until their priority increases (e.g., there is a new response from the issue filer), it creates a tighter feedback loop based around active engagement with the issue.