We've been using osTicket for quite some time now and have made substantial additions/improvements to it over the years. We would like to contribute many of these back, however our impression is that osTicket is borderline hostile to outside code contributions and therefore it seems it would just be a waste of time to do so. Now I'm not trying to point fingers or start a flame war, I'm simply trying to start a discussion so its more clear to the community what osTicket's actual position is on outside contributions.

Now I fully understand the company behind osTicket has its own plans and priorities, I get that. But it would be nice to see more communication and transparency with the community. There are hundreds of open pull requests going back seven years, many of which have no responses from osTicket developers whatsoever. This has lead to many developers wasting time duplicating work and probably countless others just not bothering to contribute anything back (such as us) since it seems like a waste of time submitting a PR that doesn't get a response.

A few examples are as follows:

Auto-Close functionality:
https://github.com/osTicket/osTicket/pull/3450 (now: https://github.com/osTicket/osTicket/pull/5108)

Originally had a few responses, but no clear feedback as to if the osTicket developers have any interest or intention of even considering it or not, let alone accepting it one day. An answer either way would sure help the developer and the community determine which direction to go with it.

If it has to be done with a plugin, this leads into some of the below, since additional APIs or signals may be required, but that seems to be a deadend too...

API:
https://github.com/osTicket/osTicket/pull/4269, https://github.com/osTicket/osTicket/pull/4265, https://github.com/osTicket/osTicket/pull/2678, https://github.com/osTicket/osTicket/pull/2134, https://github.com/osTicket/osTicket/pull/2132, ...

Obviously an API is extremely important to people (ourselves included) and I'm sure there has been a countless number of hours wasted with the multitude of different implementations people have attempted going back 5+ years. Even one project that adds an API and charges for it. Not one of those above PRs have any replies from a osTicket developer, however a few others do have replies saying that they are working on their own API, but unfortunately that has been for years now too.

Having some roadmap that specifies future features that are being added and what, if any outside contributions would be accepted would go a long way here. (Also requested several times in the forums: https://forum.osticket.com/d/91253-osticket-roadmap, https://forum.osticket.com/d/8086-roadmap-for-future-releases, ...)

Signals:
https://github.com/osTicket/osTicket/pull/4676, https://github.com/osTicket/osTicket/pull/2907

Similar to the API, signals are also extremely important for people wanting to add their own plugins or functionality, but yet again we are left with pull requests that get no response or some initial response then silence for years.

My primary point with all this is to simply start a discussion and hopefully get more transparency from the osTicket developers. Leaving PR's open for years with zero feedback whatsoever in my opinion sends a clear message that contributions are not welcome. I believe any contributor would prefer a clear response, even if that response is "Take a hike, your code sucks." or "Its not something we intend on accepting, thanks anyways". At least then other people know your position and won't waste their own time with it.

At the end of the day, the community around osTicket appears to be quite active, it seems like a shame to squander it, rather than engage and direct to it towards the betterment of all.

More communication and transparency would sure go along way.