Could we make Orca’s 3.4k+ open issues easier to navigate?

[siddqamar]

I recently came across a thread from the pnpm team about how they organize their GitHub issues.

Their approach is pretty simple:

• Issues → reproducible bugs
• Discussions → feature requests
• Dedicated repo/project → tasks and planned work

What really stood out to me was how clean the result looks: they are actively working toward zero addressable open issues.

Not because there is no work left, but because different types of work are separated instead of all living in one backlog.

That made me think about Orca.

We currently have 3.4k+ open issues, and finding an actual bug or a good contribution opportunity can take quite a bit of digging when bugs, feature requests, older tasks, and other reports are mixed together.

Would a similar separation make sense here?

For example:

Issues → Bugs with reproduction steps
Discussions → Feature requests / ideas
Projects or another workflow → Tasks / planned work

I’m not suggesting reorganizing thousands of existing issues overnight.

This could start with new issues, while older ones are categorized gradually whenever they are reviewed or touched.

I think having a clearer definition of what belongs in Issues could make the backlog much easier for both maintainers and contributors to understand.

Here’s the pnpm thread that sparked the idea:

https://x.com/pnpmjs/status/2104310921535656132

Curious what everyone thinks.

[nwparker]

Sid you're a mind reader 😂

We're doing this more or less exactly. Will try to make the changes this week

[siddqamar]

sounds good