Deciphering WONTFIX: A Mixed-Method Study on Why GitHub Issues Get Rejected

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2510.01514v1
• Date: Wed, 01 Oct 2025 23:22:18 GMT
• Title: Deciphering WONTFIX: A Mixed-Method Study on Why GitHub Issues Get Rejected
• Authors: J. Alexander Curtis, Sharadha Kasiviswanathan, Nasir Eisty,
• Abstract summary: The study examines the prevalence and reasons behind issues being labeled as wontfix across various open-source repositories on GitHub.<n>Our findings show that about 30% of projects on GitHub apply the wontfix label to some issues.<n>The study identified eight common themes behind labeling issues as wontfix, ranging from user-specific control factors to maintainer-specific decisions.
• Score: 0.0
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Context: The ``wontfix'' label is a widely used yet narrowly understood tool in GitHub repositories, indicating that an issue will not be pursued further. Despite its prevalence, the impact of this label on project management and community dynamics within open-source software development is not clearly defined. Objective: This study examines the prevalence and reasons behind issues being labeled as wontfix across various open-source repositories on GitHub. Method: Employing a mixed-method approach, we analyze both quantitative data to assess the prevalence of the wontfix label and qualitative data to explore the reasoning that it was used. Data were collected from 3,132 of GitHub's most-popular repositories. Later, we employ open coding and thematic analysis to categorize the reasons behind wontfix labels, providing a structured understanding of the issue management landscape. Results: Our findings show that about 30% of projects on GitHub apply the wontfix label to some issues. These issues most often occur on user-submitted issues for bug reports and feature requests. The study identified eight common themes behind labeling issues as wontfix, ranging from user-specific control factors to maintainer-specific decisions. Conclusions: The wontfix label is a critical tool for managing resources and guiding contributor efforts in GitHub projects. However, it can also discourage community involvement and obscure the transparency of project management. Understanding these reasons aids project managers in making informed decisions and fostering efficient collaboration within open-source communities.

Related papers

• GREPO: A Benchmark for Graph Neural Networks on Repository-Level Bug Localization [50.009407518866965]
  Repository-level bug localization is a critical software engineering challenge.<n>GNNs offer a promising alternative due to their ability to model complex, repository-wide dependencies.<n>We introduce GREPO, the first GNN benchmark for repository-scale bug localization tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-14T23:22:15Z)
• Why Authors and Maintainers Link (or Don't Link) Their PyPI Libraries to Code Repositories and Donation Platforms [83.16077040470975]
  Metadata of libraries on the Python Package Index (PyPI) plays a critical role in supporting the transparency, trust, and sustainability of open-source libraries.<n>This paper presents a large-scale empirical study combining two targeted surveys sent to 50,000 PyPI authors and maintainers.<n>We analyze more than 1,400 responses using large language model (LLM)-based topic modeling to uncover key motivations and barriers related to linking repositories and donation platforms.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-21T16:13:57Z)
• Classifying Issues in Open-source GitHub Repositories [0.0]
  GitHub is the most widely used platform for software maintenance in the open-source community.<n>Developers report issues on GitHub from time to time while facing difficulties.<n>Most of the GitHub repositories do not maintain regular labeling for the issues.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-07-25T06:20:54Z)
• Understanding Code Understandability Improvements in Code Reviews [79.16476505761582]
  We analyzed 2,401 code review comments from Java open-source projects on GitHub. 83.9% of suggestions for improvement were accepted and integrated, with fewer than 1% later reverted.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-29T12:21:23Z)
• Visual Analysis of GitHub Issues to Gain Insights [2.9051263101214566]
  This paper presents a prototype web application that generates visualizations to offer insights into issue timelines. It focuses on the lifecycle of issues and depicts vital information to enhance users' understanding of development patterns.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-30T15:17:57Z)
• Alibaba LingmaAgent: Improving Automated Issue Resolution via Comprehensive Repository Exploration [64.19431011897515]
  This paper presents Alibaba LingmaAgent, a novel Automated Software Engineering method designed to comprehensively understand and utilize whole software repositories for issue resolution.<n>Our approach introduces a top-down method to condense critical repository information into a knowledge graph, reducing complexity, and employs a Monte Carlo tree search based strategy.<n>In production deployment and evaluation at Alibaba Cloud, LingmaAgent automatically resolved 16.9% of in-house issues faced by development engineers, and solved 43.3% of problems after manual intervention.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-03T15:20:06Z)
• MAGIS: LLM-Based Multi-Agent Framework for GitHub Issue Resolution [47.850418420195304]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have shown promise in code generation but face difficulties in resolving GitHub issues. We propose a novel Multi-Agent framework for GitHub Issue reSolution, MAGIS, consisting of four agents customized for software evolution.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-26T17:57:57Z)
• Using Developer Discussions to Guide Fixing Bugs in Software [51.00904399653609]
  We propose using bug report discussions, which are available before the task is performed and are also naturally occurring, avoiding the need for additional information from developers. We demonstrate that various forms of natural language context derived from such discussions can aid bug-fixing, even leading to improved performance over using commit messages corresponding to the oracle bug-fixing commits.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-11-11T16:37:33Z)
• Supporting the Task-driven Skill Identification in Open Source Project Issue Tracking Systems [0.0]
  We investigate the automatic labeling of open issues strategy to help the contributors to pick a task to contribute. By identifying the skills, we claim the contributor candidates should pick a task more suitable. We applied quantitative studies to analyze the relevance of the labels in an experiment and compare the strategies' relative importance.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-11-02T14:17:22Z)
• Predicting Issue Types on GitHub [8.791809365994682]
  Ticket Tagger is a GitHub app analyzing the issue title and description through machine learning techniques. We empirically evaluated the tool's prediction performance on about 30,000 GitHub issues.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-07-21T08:14:48Z)
• S3M: Siamese Stack (Trace) Similarity Measure [55.58269472099399]
  We present S3M -- the first approach to computing stack trace similarity based on deep learning. It is based on a biLSTM encoder and a fully-connected classifier to compute similarity. Our experiments demonstrate the superiority of our approach over the state-of-the-art on both open-sourced data and a private JetBrains dataset.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-03-18T21:10:41Z)
• LabelGit: A Dataset for Software Repositories Classification using Attributed Dependency Graphs [11.523471275501857]
  We create a new dataset of GitHub projects called LabelGit. Our dataset uses direct information from the source code, like the dependency graph and source code neural representations from the identifiers. We hope to aid the development of solutions that do not rely on proxies but use the entire source code to perform classification.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-03-16T07:28:58Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.