[core] Update issue actions & templates

[romgrk]

Follow-up of #10372 (comment)

Improve the issue actions & templates.
Notion: https://www.notion.so/mui-org/Github-Action-to-remove-issue-template-checkboxes-a1abe3824bf04bbf9dc62d876767fe92#0d109d72986d41068cb8d22ed6a5e54e

Tests:

• https://github.com/romgrk/mui-test-issue-cleanup/issues/13
• https://github.com/romgrk/mui-test-issue-cleanup/issues/14

If you want to test this PR, https://github.com/romgrk/mui-test-issue-cleanup contains the same .github.

[romgrk]

Most of the time people come in with their bug case already known. Having to click on the docs, find an example, fork it, and modify it, is a lot of friction.

I would suggest that we provide from right here a set of starter templates for the different parts of X, this would make it easier for users.

One such example:

• Datagrid codesanbox template

Not sure if we want to have direct CSB links or if we want links through mui.com, please let me know what's best.

[michelengelen]

This sounds like a great idea.

It should reduce the pickup time by a fair margin as well, when the case is already known and can be tested against. It might also reduce a ton of misunderstanding (from my experience on past projects this happens quite a lot)

💯

[Janpot]

Good idea, +1 for direct codesandbox links. How do you see this exactly? 1 link per package? Any preference of codesandbox vs. StackBlitz?

[romgrk]

Yes one link per package would be nice. I think CSB, we've been using that everywhere.

[oliviertassinari]

Most of the time people come in with their bug case already known. Having to click on the docs, find an example, fork it, and modify it, is a lot of friction.
I would suggest that we provide from right here a set of starter templates for the different parts of X, this would make it easier for users.

I struggle to subscribe to this narrative. The current description is:

Please provide a link to a live example and an unambiguous set of steps to reproduce this bug. As a starting point, we recommend you browse the documentation, and select the closest example to your use case. Or you can use a basic template to build your reproduction case.

The current DX feels like the proposal. As I understand it, developers either go with the basic template: https://mui.com/r/x-issue-template (say they already have a reproduction), or they go with our endless stream of templates that each docs demo. The complexity is then to find the closest template, which is the inherent problem with providing more than one template. The docs feel hard to do better on: it's 1. visual, 2. organized, and 3. kept up to date.

---

A side note, screenshot is outdated:

[romgrk]

One use-case that I see quite often when I'm on support duty is the authors open their issue with their existing code pasted literally in the issue body, and we have to ask them for a live reproduction example.

One problem with the current instructions is that it's not super clear/evident that you can fork a codesandbox directly from the docs. It took me weeks to understand that when I started working here, I'm guessing it's possible a lot of people also don't realize it. I think that might be a reason why we often don't have a live example when people open issues.

In any case, I think we could provide both options? A list of direct templates, plus the instructions to the docs. I think we should also be much more explicit, something like "You are required to provide a codesandbox live example. Fork one of these templates or [docs instructions]".

[LukasTy]

That is a really great observation. We shouldn't take for granted that everyone is familiar with all the tools that we use.
Being more explicit is a great way, maybe not going overboard with required, but strongly encouraging it. 🤞

[romgrk]

I have reworked the message to include both of these, and shortened it a bit to make it more dynamic: result here.

[michelengelen]

great addition to the templates! 👍🏼

[michelengelen]

This sounds like a great idea.

It should reduce the pickup time by a fair margin as well, when the case is already known and can be tested against. It might also reduce a ton of misunderstanding (from my experience on past projects this happens quite a lot)

💯

[oliviertassinari]

@michelengelen 💯 to move this to other repositories once successful on MUI X 💃

[LukasTy]

LGTM! 👍
Seems like a worthwhile experiment.
Leaving a few nitpick comments on the grammar that could also be ignored. 🙈 🤷

[romgrk]

I've included the comments & made a few more minor adjustments. If you want to review again go ahead, this is ready on my side. You can test any of this on the test repo that mirrors this PR.