docsify
docsify copied to clipboard
chore: update issue template for feature proposal
This pull request is being automatically deployed with Vercel (learn more). To see the status of your deployment, click below or on the icon next to each commit.
🔍 Inspect: https://vercel.com/docsify-core/docsify-preview/o6vfc9d6u ✅ Preview: https://docsify-preview-git-issue-template-for-feature-request.docsify-core.vercel.app
This pull request is automatically built and testable in CodeSandbox.
To see build info of the built libraries, click here or the icon next to each commit SHA.
Latest deployment of this branch, based on commit 301016a4cfca47c2b9e664fcad16facc3fe04021:
Sandbox | Source |
---|---|
docsify-template | Configuration |
Maybe we could add a new template instead of modifying this one.
In general most people are too lazy to file issues on libs to begin with. So the simpler the better? What if it were simpler for feature requests, and we get a new template for RFCs?
If it is only for contributors I think it is really good, which has enough details to assess feasibility . but I wonder if it is for all users who want request a feature. if so, it seems more complicated.
As product users, I guess they couldn't fill in the template very well , especially the analysis of the change influences. so, I think the Drawbacks and BCA could be optional but recommend users to think about it.
This is for the contributors or someone who is willing to contribute or wants a new feature. Yea I think it would be good to make the BCA optional, not sure about drawbacks.
Maybe we could add a new template instead of modifying this one.
In general most people are too lazy to file issues on libs to begin with. So the simpler the better? What if it were simpler for feature requests, and we get a new template for RFCs?
The only thing concerning me is that how to differentiate RFC and a feature request? I think they are the same if they are related to the core part.