How to handle non-reproducable issues

[m7913d]

How should we handle issues (e.g. #41) that we cannot reproduce, and for which it is unlikely that the creator will be able to provide us with the information we need to reproduce the issue in the near future?

Is it appropriate to close such issues? Or should we keep it open with a Question (=further information is requested) label? Or something else?

@doomlaur What do you think?

[doomlaur]

Good question. On the one hand, I think that automatically marking it as stale after some time, and then automatically closing it after some more time would be the best solution in the long run. Both actions should leave enough time for the user to answer, also considering longer holidays. Maybe something like 30 days inactivity -> stale, 14 days of further inactivity -> closed. I would personally prefer having such things well organized, because having dozens or hundreds of issues that will never get closed does not make sense - besides, no one will be able to easily find relevant issues anymore, in which case they have to use the search (where closed issues can also be found).

Which brings me to the next point: I think our fork is not yet popular enough that such things are strictly necessary. I mean, we could implement actions, but we can still do them manually as well (for now). However, it will make sense in the future. Until then we could also apply the rules above manually. Since we don't have many issues yet, we can also leave them open for a longer time (e.g. 2-3 months until closing), because the list is pretty short anyway.

My whole point is: we should leave enough time for other people to comment, but it shouldn't get too messy. As long as that's the case, I'm fine with whatever solution (which we may need to adapt over time).