Good point, it makes sense to me. Regards JB
Le ven. 17 janv. 2025 à 06:51, Eric Maynard <eric.w.mayn...@gmail.com> a écrit : > I would also suggest that “bug” can be used when functionality does not > match the docs, the spec, etc. > > On Thu, Jan 16, 2025 at 9:00 PM Jean-Baptiste Onofré <j...@nanthrax.net> > wrote: > > > Hi Mike > > > > I agree, the bug label should mean: this is something breaking > > *compared* to a previous commit (as we don't have release yet :)). The > > GH Issues considering a "bug" not related to a previous commit is an > > "improvement" to me: it's not a bug introduced on top of a previous > > commit but more an "general concern/bug" we have in mind, so an > > improvement on the existing. > > > > To sum-up: > > - we should use "bug" for issue introduced by a commit after another > > commit (history) > > - we should use "improvement" for issue/improvement we want to > > implement (it could be considered as a bug from a personal standpoint > > but not related to project history) > > - we should use "new feature" for new functionality we want to > > implement in the project > > - we should use "proposal" for design/MVP > > > > Regards > > JB > > > > On Thu, Jan 16, 2025 at 10:56 PM Michael Collado <collado.m...@gmail.com > > > > wrote: > > > > > > Hey folks > > > > > > There are over 40 issues with the "bug" label in github right now, many > > of > > > which are not actually bugs, but seem to me like personal preferences > or > > > possible improvements. A lot of these issues seem like reasonable or > good > > > changes to me, but I think we should reserve the "bug" label for things > > > that are actual bugs. Can we remove the bug label from issues that > aren't > > > actually broken? > > > > > > Mike > > >
