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
{{ message }}
Repository navigation
gh issue create issue type supports old behavior #14386
always builds its option list directly from the repo's configured issue types and never inserts a "none selected" choice, so there's currently no way to skip setting a type interactively. I'm suggesting enhancement and gh-issue. This isn't a duplicate of #13804/#14367 (those are about the permission error thrown when applying the selected type), since this issue is specifically about the prompt lacking a "none" option.
12. > We should have a way to say you don't want a type interactively.
Using config/option seems to bring a lot of trouble. Is there any harm in adding a `[None]` item?
Sorry for the confusion - I didn't mean to suggest a config option. I think your suggestion to add some None value to the options is the correction one 👍
I find this change also surprising: specifically the web allows me to create an issue without a "type" but the cli forces me to choose one.
What I expect is different from the OP: I'd expect the selection of "type" to move to the same place "labels" are i.e under optional metadata to add once the issue is created.
I do not think it's worth creating a different issue to describe this but I'm happy to if it makes things more clear.
@cli/code-reviewers I’d like to contribute a small fix here: add (none) as the first issue-type choice, leave the type unset when selected, and preserve selection of real types. The wording would match the milestone picker.
Would this scope be welcome as an external contribution? If so, could you confirm the acceptance criteria and add help wanted?
I have a local fix with regression coverage. I noticed #14448 was closed unmerged, so I wanted to check before opening another PR.
Activity
cli-triage commentedon Sep 8, 2026
Thanks for the report! This looks like an enhancement request rather than a regression: the interactive "Issue type" prompt added in
cli/pkg/cmd/issue/create/create.go
Lines 362 to 378 in 0d121e8
enhancementandgh-issue. This isn't a duplicate of #13804/#14367 (those are about the permission error thrown when applying the selected type), since this issue is specifically about the prompt lacking a "none" option.williammartin commentedon Sep 10, 2026
Hey @A4-Tacks, is your issue here that you are being forced to choose an issue type when you don't want to?
A4-Tacks commentedon Sep 10, 2026
Yes, usually, I don't want a issue type
(Issues created using templates on the web also seem to have no issue type)
williammartin commentedon Sep 10, 2026
Yeh fair enough @BagToad you did the work here, are we missing something in being able to avoid selecting a type?
BagToad commentedon Sep 10, 2026
@williammartin I think this is just an oversight. We should have a way to say you don't want a type interactively.
There's some related work going on in #13899 that I haven't had a chance to review again.
A4-Tacks commentedon Sep 10, 2026
Using config/option seems to bring a lot of trouble. Is there any harm in adding a
[None]item?BagToad commentedon Sep 10, 2026
Sorry for the confusion - I didn't mean to suggest a config option. I think your suggestion to add some
Nonevalue to the options is the correction one 👍pokui commentedon Oct 3, 2026
I find this change also surprising: specifically the web allows me to create an issue without a "type" but the cli forces me to choose one.
What I expect is different from the OP: I'd expect the selection of "type" to move to the same place "labels" are i.e under optional metadata to add once the issue is created.
I do not think it's worth creating a different issue to describe this but I'm happy to if it makes things more clear.
yousefissa commentedon Oct 4, 2026
@cli/code-reviewers I’d like to contribute a small fix here: add
(none)as the first issue-type choice, leave the type unset when selected, and preserve selection of real types. The wording would match the milestone picker.Would this scope be welcome as an external contribution? If so, could you confirm the acceptance criteria and add
help wanted?I have a local fix with regression coverage. I noticed #14448 was closed unmerged, so I wanted to check before opening another PR.