You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Thank you this is excellent tool! It has been very helpful in improving our issue triage process.
I'd like to propose allowing the assignees parameter to have duplicate entries when numOfAssignee is 1, to enable weighting of individual assignees.
We currently have four maintainers on our team: two full-time and two volunteers, and we'd like to proportionately assign new issues more frequently to the full-time maintainers. Our rough target is 4:1, such that a full-time maintainer is randomly assigned to a new issue on average four times more frequently than a volunteer.
My strategy to effect this was to define assignees with 10 total entries:
Hi @jeremystretch, thanks for the feedback. This is a good feature request.
I just released a new version that addresses this need but I decided to adopt a slightly different syntax to make it more readable (see readme). Enjoy!
Thank you this is excellent tool! It has been very helpful in improving our issue triage process.
I'd like to propose allowing the
assignees
parameter to have duplicate entries whennumOfAssignee
is 1, to enable weighting of individual assignees.We currently have four maintainers on our team: two full-time and two volunteers, and we'd like to proportionately assign new issues more frequently to the full-time maintainers. Our rough target is 4:1, such that a full-time maintainer is randomly assigned to a new issue on average four times more frequently than a volunteer.
My strategy to effect this was to define
assignees
with 10 total entries:However, this line reduces the
assignees
list to a set of unique names, defeating the purpose and effecting an equal weighting for all users.I appreciate the need to determine unique names when assigning multiple users, but could the logic be tweaked to avoid this when
numOfAssignee
is 1?The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: