All PRs should have referenced issues about community HOT 2 CLOSED

Plus one on encouraging documents, -1 on a wide range policy like this. Issues are great but aren't necessary and don't always add value.

My refrain on all of this is going to be just trusting people to use their judgment and do the best thing for the project.

from community.

I propose that all PRs should have an attached issue. This can be enforced with a bot.

I'm a big fan of well written issues but I disagree with both of these for two reasons:

• there's a long tail of minor contributions where this requirement is unneeded friction (my first contribution to this repo was fixing a broken URL in a README: would I have done that contribution if the threat of "this PR must have an issue" had actually been enforced? 🤷)
• requiring the existence of an issue does not mean there is any valuable information in that issue

I think you cannot create a culture of quality by adding this type of enforcement mechanisms on the org level: for individual projects enforcement may make sense but even then the culture requires committed maintainers first, enforcement just ensures no slipping up from that commitment.

If there are useful metrics in this area that can be calculated, then a yearly review might be something the org could do instead: Have a look at "project quality/health proxy metrics" for all projects, take action if any important projects are lagging behind or trending negatively.

from community.