🚀 Feature: Consider adding an issue form / template like 🧪 Tests: ...

[JoshuaKGoldberg]

Bug Report Checklist

• I have pulled the latest main branch of the repository.
• I have searched for related issues and found none that matched my issue.

Overview

For a while now, this template has used an area: testing label that's separate from area: tooling (#119). Example filed issue: JoshuaKGoldberg/should-semantic-release#177

But there's no issue template for it. I've held off adding one because:

• I didn't want to over-clutter the issue templates. Anything beyond 4 IMO gets progressively more tiresome to read through.
• It's pretty uncommon that someone who isn't a repository maintainer would file a testing issue...

Additional Info

I think the root issue is that I want a way to gate issue templates on user role. I.e. only contributors on a repo should be able to see this proposed testing template. This has been proposed before, e.g. in https://github.com/orgs/community/discussions/63402#discussioncomment-8122558.

Filing for posterity. If someone has strong reasoning behind creating an issue form, it'd be good to post it here. I'll probably wait a while and then close this out if not.

[rubiesonthesky]

I like this. I think there may be reason why non-maintainer wants to raise tooling issue. Separating test issues feels nice because the tooling section can get overcrowded.

But on the other hand I understand the concern about issue templates. If the categories are really clear , then I don’t see harm to have few more :)

Not sure if it’s possible, but maybe this should be option? I mean, this categorisation may make sense more in some projects than in others. For example, in TypeStat this feels needed right now but in some other project this may feel unnecessary.

[JoshuaKGoldberg]

Yeah I'm going to go ahead and close this out. It hasn't been a common task in the last ~half year or so. If folks want to add it in, I think it'll be repo-dependent-enough that an option wouldn't do it justice.

Thanks for the discussion!