Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Transition from .md to .yml for Issue Templates #4165

Open
Venkatesh-Krishnan-R opened this issue Jul 29, 2024 · 2 comments
Open

Transition from .md to .yml for Issue Templates #4165

Venkatesh-Krishnan-R opened this issue Jul 29, 2024 · 2 comments

Comments

@Venkatesh-Krishnan-R
Copy link

What are you trying to achieve?
Transitioning our issue templates from Markdown (.md) files to YAML (.yml) files. This shift is intended to improve user interaction and streamline the issue-creation process. The aim is to provide a more intuitive and structured way for users to report bugs, request features, and provide feedback.
Advantages:

  1. Enhanced user experience with dropdowns, text areas, and validations.
  2. More structured and consistent issue reporting.
  3. Simplified maintenance and updates to issue templates.

What did you expect to see?
screenshot (3)
Additional context.
Add any other context about the problem here. If you followed an existing documentation, please share the link to it.

I have attached a couple of screenshots showing how the structure looks and how the create issue page appears. I have currently only created it for one specification, and since it is working fine, I can proceed with creating it for the rest of the specifications.

image

Once it is reviewed, I can create a PR for the change

@Venkatesh-Krishnan-R Venkatesh-Krishnan-R added the spec:miscellaneous For issues that don't match any other spec label label Jul 29, 2024
@danielgblanco danielgblanco added triage:deciding:community-feedback and removed spec:miscellaneous For issues that don't match any other spec label labels Jul 29, 2024
@danielgblanco
Copy link
Contributor

Hi there, I've removed the spec label as this is not specific to the spec itself but rather the repo. I personally like this idea, but will leave it for other community members to give their opinion.

@Venkatesh-Krishnan-R
Copy link
Author

I'm glad to receive input from others on how we can streamline it :)

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants