Formed in 2009, the Archive Team (not to be confused with the archive.org Archive-It Team) is a rogue archivist collective dedicated to saving copies of rapidly dying or deleted websites for the sake of history and digital heritage. The group is 100% composed of volunteers and interested parties, and has expanded into a large amount of related projects for saving online and digital history.
Close discussions #3097
Replies
|
Same exact use case here: I'm using discussions for feature requests and it would be very useful to mark them as done/rejected. Right now there's no way of looking at the feature requests list and tell which one are pending and which one are completed. Alternatively to closing discussions, it would be interesting to be able to convert them to issues (which would enable to close them via a PR, for example) |
|
I don't think Discussions is a place for feature requests. Actually I use "an issue is what can be closed/resolved by a pull request" as the rule to decide when to open an issue and when to open a discussion. However, you certainly can have a different rule. However, I still want discussions to be closable. A discussion should be closed when the conversation is resolved, while an issue should be closed by a pull request/commit. |
|
I mentioned feature requests because "Ideas for new features" is literally one the default categories when you enable Discussions on a project:
If feature requests don't belong to Discussions, then I would propose to remove that default option because it's quite crucial for feature requests to be addressable in some way (mark them as done, rejected, or in progress, for instance) |
|
AFAIK, there's no public-accepted convention of the difference between issues and discussions. But I believe it doesn't make sense to use different systems for feature requests and bug reports. On the first day Discussions was in public beta, another maintainer of CP Editor converted several feature requests into discussions without my acknowledgment, so now I'm eagerly waiting for #2861. So I'd agree that it shouldn't be encouraged to use Discussions for feature requests in the UI of GitHub. |
|
Thanks for the feedback! We are tracking this request on our end and using this thread to gauge customer impact via upvotes and reactions. |
|
Hi @evi-liu, I suppose this feature is a generalisation of the "Answered" thing for questions, but that work for all the categories... |
|
I would also like this. It cannot be determined from the discussions listing whether a "general discussion" has been resolved. For Q&A there's a green check mark but for general discussion the options are lock or delete. I don't want to do either, I just want some way to mark it that the discussion is resolved. If a general discussion can't be answered, it can be resolved /ended with a green check mark. Right now we have two general discussions, one has resolved itself, and one has ended, but no way to signal they've ended. |
|
Another use case from my team at Athens Research https://github.com/athensresearch/athens/blob/master/README.md We are an active and growing community around an open source product and are looking for ways to make feature requests more tractable. The voting system in the discussions section is great because it allows us to see which features are the most requested (or will at least when we get more momentum using it for feature requests). I'm already anticipating the challenges mentioned by posters above. I'm imagining that where you are able to select the discussion format (currently the options are Q&A and open discussion) you might have a feature request format that allows discussions to be marked as closed or resolved. Likewise I could see a discussion format option with custom parameters that might allow for other use cases as well. Looking forward to a solution. If I can be of any more help please let me know! Thanks! |
As it goes with any discussion, there is a natural point a discussion comes to an end.
Sadly, currently, I cannot find a way to close a discussion .. only to lock the conversation.
The reason we would like this:
Currently we are using Discussions to talk over feature requests, as it has a more natural format for that (being able to reply to a comment is really helpful here). But as time goes on, either the feature request gets implemented or is rejected. In either case, we would like to mark the Discussion as such, without being all evil and locking anyone from continue the conversation if there is a need. Very similar to issues and PRs.
Now we notice people are unaware a feature has either been rejected or implemented, and keep contributing to something already decided. This requires us to change the original post to note this, but it is a very annoying workflow. Especially as there is also no way to label discussions.
Easier would be if there was a category-type that would lend itself for this workflow, where we can just mark a Discussion as "closed" or "resolved" or similar. Not so much as a QA, as there is no right answer.
Would this be possible? Or is it already, and am I just overlooking this?
Thank you!