Rethink labels

[ferhatelmas]

We have some labels can be removed or means same thing.

I think we can apply some scoped labeling similar to README labels.

My suggestion {area}/{type} where type is one of feature, improvement, bug, docs and type is one of exercises, config, readme, ci, etc.

Additionally, we can have 2 more dimensions: easy, medium, hard for difficulty, and special flags like nextercism, hacktoberfest, etc.

What do you think ?

[tleen]

I think that's a good idea, @robphoenix started doing that a while ago and it did make things clearer. The only thing is we need to keep universal labels like "good first issue" because they are used by GitHub for things like auto-discovery.

[leenipper]

Making sure I understand how it might look....
So, for an issue like #922 it might have label enhancement/exercises ? or feature/exercises ?

2 more dimensions: easy, medium, ...

Are these suffixes added on too? Like enhancement/exercises/medium

[tleen]

Perhaps difficulty would be their own labels difficulty/medium or some such, that way they can be searched/selected separately from the topic label.

Seems like area would be the overall section of the track concern (exercises, config, readme, ci,) while type would be the cross-cutting concern (feature, improvement, bug, docs)?

So like it has now an inadequate section of the README could be labeled readme/inadequate and difficulty/easy? Or @ferhatelmas were you thinking the reverse? inadequate/readme?

[ferhatelmas]

If we are write readme/inadequate or inadequate/readme, I think we are mixing area and type. For example, I was thinking like area/readme, type/enchancement and difficulty/easy.

[ferhatelmas]

However, this wasn't what I had thought at first so I might be confusing at first. Let me know if it's clearer now.

[tleen]

Ah gotcha. That makes sense too.

[junedev]

Closing this because of nearly 3 years of inactivity.