# Improve communication with contributors on the issue tracker and PRs (Language summit follow up)

**URL:** <https://discuss.python.org/t/improve-communication-with-contributors-on-the-issue-tracker-and-prs-language-summit-follow-up/15812>\
**Category:** Core Development\
**Created:** [May 17, 2022, 2:07pm UTC](https://discuss.python.org/t/improve-communication-with-contributors-on-the-issue-tracker-and-prs-language-summit-follow-up/15812 "2022-05-17T14:07:33Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Showing post:** 25

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![ezio-melotti](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/f17d59/32.png) [@ezio-melotti](https://discuss.python.org/u/ezio-melotti)\
**Post date:** [June 24, 2022, 8:13pm UTC](https://discuss.python.org/t/improve-communication-with-contributors-on-the-issue-tracker-and-prs-language-summit-follow-up/15812/25 "2022-06-24T20:13:44Z")

</div>

> [@iritkatriel](#):
>
> So you clearly have in mind a label for triagers

I think you are misunderstanding me. I’ll try to summarize:

- issues can be grouped in three categories: “valid”, “invalid”, “not yet determined”
- invalid issues can be closed, leaving us with “not yet determined” and “valid”
- the distinction between the two can be determined by the presence (or absence) of a label

I think we both agree on this.

* * *

One of the initial point of contention, which is also related to the name of the label and to the group of people that apply the label, is what exactly “valid” means.

An issue can initially go through the following stages:

- new/untriaged → partially triaged → fully triaged → approved

My initial goal was to draw the line around “fully triaged”\[1\], whereas you want to draw it further ahead, around “approved”\[2\]. This is fine with me, because it seems to accomplish both my and your goals:

- My goal was to make sure that all new issues were looked at by a triager/core-dev. If you search for issues that are not yet approved and sort by creation date (which is already the default), you will find the new/untriaged on top. There will also be some additional issues that have ongoing discussions (or are languishing in a limbo) at the bottom of the list, but I can easily live with that.
- Your goal was (IIUC) to determine if the issue is valid or not, in order to tell the OP whether he still has to do something or if it’s now up to the core-devs to push the issue forward.

This is why I said that there is overlapping, even though with the line pushed further ahead, the name `(un)triaged` clearly becomes inappropriate.

* * *

The next point of contention is whether to:

- have “not yet determined” as the default, and add a label to mark issues as “valid”
- have a label for “not yet determined” added automatically on new issues, and remove it once the issue is accepted as “valid”

I prefer the latter, for the reasons stated [above](https://discuss.python.org/t/improve-communication-with-contributors-on-the-issue-tracker-and-prs-language-summit-follow-up/15812/10):

> - it’s easy to search for issues that need attention
> - it’s easier to remove the label than adding it
> - it doesn’t add an extra label to all open issues

* * *

Another point of contention (somewhat irrelevant, but I might as well clarify), is who should approve issues:

- some issues are clearly invalid: both triagers and experts can close them;
- some issues are clearly valid: both triagers and expert can add/remove the label;
- some issues are ambiguous: triagers should ping relevant experts and let them decide.

* * *

Finally, the name of the label should be decided based on whether the label should be removed or added:

- if the label is added automatically to new issues: `awaiting approval`, `needs approval`, `pending approval` or something along these lines might work. Since relatively few issues will have the label for a short period of time before they are approved or rejected, it doesn’t matter if it’s a bit long.
- if the label is added once the issue is approved: `valid`, `approved`, `accepted`, `acknowledged` might work.

* * *

In addition, I also wanted to ask you if you are still planning to use this label programmatically to have a bot pinging the OP/core-devs after a period of inactivity.

* * *

1. meaning that all relevant labels have been set and the experts mentioned 

2. meaning that either the bug has been confirmed valid, or a feature requested approved

---

_[View the full topic](https://discuss.python.org/t/improve-communication-with-contributors-on-the-issue-tracker-and-prs-language-summit-follow-up/15812)._