Cleanup issues

[RayOei]

As we are looking into what would fit on the roadmap: another good moment to go over what is in the issue list and close what is no longer of any importance.
I have not enough background information, at this time, but issues from more then 5-12(!) years ago have likely not any value anymore.

I would suggest to go through what anybody feels may still be relevant and add a comment to that effect. The label technical debt is also useful for issues which still need addressing.
The others could get a won't fix label and be closed.

This would be helpful to get to a list of items which actually need addressing.

Thoughts?

[RayOei]

The same is true for PR's.
There are old ones, some referencing versions which have passed by now. If PR's have no future we should close them.

[RayOei]

As an example: a very old #27 is also referenced in a newer #83 which was closed in 2021. As there is no additional information it is unclear what the thinking is here?
I can imagine adding tags is a useful but apparently is has never been deemed really needed? Personally I would close it because of that.

[lentschi]

I fully agree that issues/PRs need a cleanup! 👍

Deciding what to close as 'Won't fix' means a lot of work however and I think it's not something one person should do alone. Maybe we should start collaboratively setting up a list of issues/PRs, that are likely to be obsolete, here in this discussion. That way everyone gets a chance to raise objections. We could leave it here for 1-2 months and then close everything that's not been appealed...?

[RayOei]

I have added the label discuss to indicate an issue anyone wants to discuss.
It is still helpful to add comments and other labels when applicable. Like won't fix.
Clear duplicates can be closed too, with a reference to the issue it duplicated. I think we shouldn't be too afraid to close things if they seem meaningless by now. There not gone so can always be revived if needed or mistakes were made?

To some degree cleaning PR's seems even more useful: either it is something which can still be added or it is no longer needed, wanted or adding value.

[RayOei]

Went through the majority of PR's not from any of you and added my comment and take which in essence means most can be closed in my view. Unless there is something I miss, obviously 😁

[lentschi]

I think, what might help preventing stale issues/PRs in the future (at least a little) is providing templates for them - e.g. https://axolo.co/blog/p/part-3-github-pull-request-template

I guess something as simple as this must have been discussed in the past...? If so, why has it been dismissed?

Also - as a general rule - I would vote to always try and create an issue before creating a PR. (Otherwise the description of what is to be implemented/fixed tends to be mixed with how it is being implemented/fixed. When reading such an issue-less PR after some time has passed, it's hard to figure out, what the original problem was.)

[RayOei]

I think, what might help preventing stale issues/PRs in the future (at least a little) is providing templates for them - e.g. https://axolo.co/blog/p/part-3-github-pull-request-template

Created #1141

[RayOei]

For reference the what to do with stale PR's comment as a discussion item on the cleanup.