Triage immediately. Overnight issues triaged next morning. Label issues with one of the following:
support
The issue is a question about how to use the software.
bug
The issue reports a known, reproducible bug in the software.
enhancement
The issue requests a feature to be added to the software.
Once replied to, if the reporter of the issue does not respond within 7 days, the issue will be closed due to inactivity.
TDB
TBD
Review immediately. Overnight PRs reviewed the next morning. Label PRs with one of the following:
breaking - The code change in the pull request is backward-compatible with the existing published version of the software.
non-breaking - The code change in the pull request is fully backward-compatible with the existing published version of the software.
next-major - The code change in the pull request may be breaking or non-breaking but is intended to be published in the next major release of the software.
next-minor - The code change in the pull request may only be non-breaking and is intended to be published in the next minor release of the software.
next-patch - The code change in the pull request may only be non-breaking and is intended to be published in the next patch release of the software.
experimental - The code change is experimental and is only intended for peer reivew and local testing.
TBD
I want to second Matt about rotation. Reason being , getting a balance between 'Everyone spends time on the same issue' / 'One person ends up managing most all the time' syndromes. If we are not sure about a specific component, obviously we can reach out to whomever has more experience on those to get a resolution. Also if a person starts answering an issue, they could assume responsibility for getting it closed out (obviously everyone can jump in to give views and close out too).