You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
In the GitHub Issues.querys section, I've noticed that the "default" query displays all open issues of the current repository assigned to me, organized by milestones as tree nodes. While attempting to recreate this structure with custom queries, I encountered challenges, specifically in having subtrees under the tree node corresponding to the "label" assigned to the query.
For instance, I want to access closed issues using:
It would be ideal to have these issues ordered in subtrees by their repository names.
Is it currently possible to configure such a structure in VSCode? If not, I propose it as a valuable feature to enhance the usability and flexibility of the GitHub Pull Requests and Issues extension.
Your guidance on achieving this structure or consideration for implementing it as a feature would be greatly appreciated.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
In the GitHub Issues.querys section, I've noticed that the "default" query displays all open issues of the current repository assigned to me, organized by milestones as tree nodes. While attempting to recreate this structure with custom queries, I encountered challenges, specifically in having subtrees under the tree node corresponding to the "label" assigned to the query.
For instance, I want to access closed issues using:
However, this setup doesn't provide subnodes with milestones.
Additionally, I would like to review my other open issues across different repositories:
It would be ideal to have these issues ordered in subtrees by their repository names.
Is it currently possible to configure such a structure in VSCode? If not, I propose it as a valuable feature to enhance the usability and flexibility of the GitHub Pull Requests and Issues extension.
Your guidance on achieving this structure or consideration for implementing it as a feature would be greatly appreciated.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: