I think maybe we still don't want the bad UI/UX in the image below? The issue on it was closed: Avoid toast for AgentErrorEvent • as 'not planned' from Linear, with no human author, no one to speak to • without a sentence or explanation, as to why is this UI just fine. This comes across a little weird, and it's worth considering that it's maybe not the way we want to appear to the public either? In the OpenHands project, we usually have posted a human message when the human closes an issue. (We have the automated deprecation/archive workflow for things that are not interesting to anyone for too long, that one posts a github automated message.) Could we please: • continue to post a sentence, at least, in the vast majority of cases where an issue is closed by a human? So that we know and people know the reasoning • with a human that takes responsibility for the choice they made • in the case below, I'm guessing no one actually believe this UI/UX is fine. I'll take the blame for assuming that the agent, when it made the issue from Slack, included a link to that Slack - it appears that it didn't, so maybe the issue was not clear enough? But if anyone thinks this is fine UI/UX, please say so. I'd love it if we could speak in human, if we can, not in "automated corporate" 🙏 😇 I believe Open Source projects are better when we actually take advantage of communication and the experience that people may have. I love the push to do things fast, and I totally sympathize with the fact that we feel maybe drowning in issues. I would suggest that maybe a few went too far though, and it's not actually good to remove from sight an issue as bad for the users as this one. For the record, I was seeing it again just minutes ago, on the Cloud deployment.

Hi Engel - looking into this!

Same goes for several others

@calm-artist-7206 It was me! I was the problem 🫣 . Just for some context, I am a new EM on the team, and I was going through the team's backlog to help sift through which bugs/issues looked like they were being actioned in community (🎉), and which could still use some prioritization and attention. I added that status under the false assumption it would not impact GH issues, as a way to help me organize. Obviously, that did not work out well, so apologies for the confusion. I'll make sure any process going forward doesn't negatively impact GH issues and status.

Thank you for the response! Sorry for the quick reaction 🙏 This is interesting and maaaaybe a little funny to be honest. You were working to give attention to the issues, while to me it looked like, The Faceless Corporation(tm) shuts off voices and breaks the user experience, as it must! 😹 I appreciate it. And I don’t know, it seems so complicated to deal with two tracking systems, but the labels are common, aren’t they?

No, I'm so glad you surfaced this quickly! I did not intend to close those issues in GH, I was happy to see some activity on them (usually open PRs), and was separating from those which appeared to be languishing. We def have some work to do on how we're tracking work, so more to come there. But this is a good reminder that whatever we do internally shouldn't impact the community in unintended ways.

To clarify, I moved the issues back to open state myself when I got the notification that they were closed and reviewed them.

Ah okay, and I am on the west coast so I came late the party this am, after you'd manually fixed these. There weren't many that I'd moved, and there was only one I saw when I got online, and I moved back to an open status.

Thank you 😹