Issue assignment process clarification

[hamishwillee]

The Guidelines for working on an issue suggest that users self assign if they can, and otherwise add a comment asking to be assigned.

In theory this is good - user asks to be assigned, and a core user then assigns them. Historically though this often doesn't work - you get people asking to be assigned to multiple issues, then getting assigned and doing no work. The issues then rot.

The current and well established process is that authors start work and create the cross link Fixes #<issue no.> in the PR to implicitly assign the issue.

• The weakness in the process is that there is a window where multiple users might attempt to take the issue, and it is a little harder to see who owns the issue.
• The benefit is that it is clear that the assignee is actually working on the issue, and you can still assign as needed etc.

This updates the process to reflect how assignment is actually handled on MDN.

[github-actions]

Preview URLs (1 page)

• /en-US/docs/MDN/Community/Issues

External URLs (2)

URL: /en-US/docs/MDN/Community/Issues
Title: Creating and working on issues

• https://docs.github.com/en/issues/tracking-your-work-with-issues/using-issues/assigning-issues-and-pull-requests-to-other-github-users (1 time) (Note! This may be a new URL 👀)
• https://github.com/orgs/mdn/projects/25 (1 time) (Note! This may be a new URL 👀)

(comment last updated: 2026-02-01 22:50:43)

[chrisdavidmills]

@hamishwillee looks good, man; a couple of suggestions, but nothing major.

Also, while you're here, consider:

• Fixing the grammar issue in the first numbered bullet — "If you're looking to contribute, search for issues with" should be "If you're looking to contribute, search for issues with a"
• Adding a warning about not submitting AI slop fixes, as they waste our time as we will probably close them? Hrm, maybe this one requires more discussion.

[caugner]

LGTM from my point of view, I'll let others approve.

[hamishwillee]

Thanks all for the review - I have accepted all suggestions and fixed the typo. Chris, yes, would be great to add a comment on AI slop as a separate PR.

[dipikabh]

Thanks for taking this on, Hamish! 🙌
I have a few rewording suggestions and a broader suggestion to adjust the step list to accommodate the current set of changes.

[chrisdavidmills]

Looks good from my end.

[dipikabh]

Great work! Approving.
I'll check in on Monday to see how it shapes up.

[hamishwillee]

Thanks for the review @dipikabh - much improved. Merging.