DOC: adopt label convention for issue annotation

[jreback]

this is the schema from astropy

https://github.com/astropy/astropy/wiki/Issue-labeling-convention

Numpy/scipy are considering this

might make issue navigation easier

making this issue for comments on these labels (I am for accepting them almost as is)

---

package-novice - accessible to someone who has no knowledge of astropy internals and can be done without this knowledge.
package-intermediate - accessible to someone who has at least good experience in using the package and understands the issue well.
package-expert - accessible only to people intimately familiar with the sub-package/functionality.
effort-low - a few hours at most
effort-medium - a few days at most
effort-high - longer term
The effort should be indicated for the package-... level specified (so the effort may be lower for a more experienced developer). We also use the following tags:

domain-specialist - indicates that knowledge of the specific domain (e.g. cosmology, coordinate transformation) is needed.
the we should doc these on the contributors page

[jorisvandenbossche]

+1

But at the same time some other things about the labels/github workflow:

• I think we should do a clean-up / reorganisation of the other existing labels as well.
• Also eg in ipython and matplotlib, they work with labels on PRs indicating the status like needs-review, waiting-for-author (they have a really detailed github workflow: https://github.com/ipython/ipython/wiki/Dev%3A-GitHub-workflow, although this is not mentioned there)
• more clear indication if a certain issue (eg enhancement proposal) is something we really want, or is something that first should be discussed

[jreback]

all of these labels now exist.

pls label with a difficulty/effort when creating a new label.
and try to label as many existing ones as possible.