Hey there @LekoArts! Right now Discussions are "stateless" so they are not open/closed. When you request for a Discussion to be "closed" by a PR what are you hoping the outcomes would be? Is it related to tagging, where it shows up in a list etc?

You mention that the PR can have the Discussion marked as answer - how do you expect the correct comment be attributed as the answer? Or would this solution perhaps be more high level as a PR "resolving" a Discussion and marking it as such?

This is most certainly being tracked as an open conversation on our end. The more information we can get, the better!

Thanks for the answer!

Just for context, I've grown up with web forums and their etiquette, usage and software. So that's where I draw inspiration from and make comparisons.

When you request for a Discussion to be "closed" by a PR what are you hoping the outcomes would be?

As you rightfully said, Discussions currently only have an unanswered/answered state -- in the context of a PR implementing a feature that was requested in a Discussion these two states kinda are not 100% fitting. The outcome should be two things:

1. A comment like "Fixes #xxx" automatically edits said Discussion
2. Said Discussion is moved into a state that makes sense in the context of a PR implementing/fixing/resolving something

As currently only unanswered/answered exists my first suggestion in the "How" paragraph uses this.

Automation is really important here, as we (Gatsby) with a huge OSS repo deal with hundreds of PRs a week -- and if we'd have to manually go to each Discussion, create a post with a backlink to the PR and mark it as answer, we'd waste so much time.

Is it related to tagging, where it shows up in a list etc?

It can certainly help with filtering a list, e.g. open RFCs and implemented RFCs. This is already possible with the unanswered/answered state if you're not too attached to the wording and just say that you'll see "answered" discussions as implemented.

You mention that the PR can have the Discussion marked as answer - how do you expect the correct comment be attributed as the answer?

That would be my first idea:

When merging a PR a bot could post a message in the discussion with a link to the PR and mark the answer as "answered"

This bot message could contain a message like:

The [PR](/link-to-pr) resolves this discussion. This messsage will be automatically marked as answer.

Or would this solution perhaps be more high level as a PR "resolving" a Discussion and marking it as such?

Yep, that would be the second idea. In short: A third state, similar to how forum posts can be closed/open + have an answer marked as the solution.

Enabling automation via actions is on our list - We heard similar feedback from Vercel and other communities that automation is key here. Thank you so much for all of this context @LekoArts! As soon as I have an update for you regarding the tagging/automation piece(s) of this we'll let you know.

@becca may we get an update on this? We are going to use discussions for feature requests, and locking discussion when the feature is implemented would be tremendously helpful - either if we do with a closing keyword or using GitHub Actions

We're also use discussions for feature requests. It'll be helpful to automatically close discussions via closing keyword.