Recommend direct PRs for trivial changes in the issue template menu

[johnslavik]

I find it that people often open issues just for typo fixes. Sometimes these typo fixes should rather go unfixed, because they're not user-facing in any meaningful way.

Maybe this would help?

Or maybe there's too much on this list already?

This one would redirect to https://github.com/python/cpython/pulls.

Preview it at https://github.com/johnslavik/cpython/issues / https://github.com/johnslavik/cpython/issues/new/choose.

I'll submit a PR if I get a green light here.

cc @AA-Turner @hugovk.

Linked PRs

• gh-144242: Note that issues aren't needed for typos in docs template #144288

[gvanrossum]

Isupport the idea, though I'm not sure the proposed UX is sufficient (that's a very long list!). But I'm not the decider.

[StanFromIreland]

I have a feeling most stop reading when they see the "Documentation" option, as such I would suggest adding a note to the docs template (targeted advertisement ;-), e.g. this one I just wrote.

[picnixz]

If we do it we really need to stress that only user-facing typos changes will be accepted.

Code commenta are usually not fixed unless they are wrong. And this could be confusing with Documentation fixes :/ However it was brought to my attention that we do not have a section about which typo fixes are accepted in the devguide so maybe start with this?

[johnslavik]

Isupport the idea, though I'm not sure the proposed UX is sufficient (that's a very long list!). But I'm not the decider.

Thanks @gvanrossum! I suppose the suggestion from @StanFromIreland might be better than mine here to overcome the "list almost overflow" problem.

I have a feeling most stop reading when they see the "Documentation" option, as such I would suggest adding a note to the docs template (targeted advertisement ;-), e.g. this one I just wrote.

I think this is an excellent idea. We could have both (issue template menu entry + template admonition notice) or we could just simply have the notice in an issue template.

Typo issues are sometimes also filed as "bugs", so perhaps we can add your notice to the bug report template, too:

No hard feelings to this proposal though -- I've skimmed through the issue tracker, and this happens not so often. Plus:

1. Sometimes typos are bugs.
2. It could be annoying to people reporting real bugs.

However it was brought to my attention that we do not have a section about which typo fixes are accepted

Sounds like python/devguide#1448. As a person who had submitted a no-value typo PR myself in the past, I could be interested in this one :-)

After we do that, we can link to this section of the devguide in the proposed notice.

[gvanrossum]

And docstrings? Those are user-facing, since many tools extract them and show them in editing UIs.

[johnslavik]

And docstrings? Those are user-facing, since many tools extract them and show them in editing UIs.

Hmm, what are you referring to, in what context? We've already gotten a few threads branching off from this issue 😅

[picnixz]

For docstrings:

• If they already exist and contain errors, yes we fix them.
• If they do not exist we usually avoid adding them because this requires synchronizing them with the rST.
• If they are a bit incomplete but not incorrect we leave them as is (and prefer improving the online docs).

[hugovk]

And docstrings? Those are user-facing, since many tools extract them and show them in editing UIs.

Hmm, what are you referring to, in what context? We've already gotten a few threads branching off from this issue 😅

Yes, docstrings show up in things like IDEs and our own REPL's help():

Details

For docstrings:

• If they already exist and contain errors, yes we fix them.

👍

• If they do not exist we usually avoid adding them because this requires synchronizing them with the rST.
• If they are a bit incomplete but not incorrect we leave them as is (and prefer improving the online docs).

I disagree. Docstrings are an important way of consuming docs. I think we should value them and put effort into them, whether they're old or new. Or we maybe should look into a way to extracting from one to another, but that's a very big topic! In any case, we're getting very much off-topic!

[hugovk]

Back on-topic:

I have a feeling most stop reading when they see the "Documentation" option, as such I would suggest adding a note to the docs template (targeted advertisement ;-), e.g. this one I just wrote.

Yeah, let's do this, it's a minimal change to an existing category.

Once the mentioned devguide issue is implemented, we can link this note to it.

[StanFromIreland]

I'll clean it up and send it in.

[johnslavik]

@StanFromIreland, what are you picking up? The devguide issue or the note?
I'd like to contribute too! :)

[StanFromIreland]

I meant I'd tidy up the wording I have here and open a PR.

[johnslavik]

Cool! Tag me for review. I'll work on the devguide issue.