I suggest to set both Needs-Triage and Issue-Question labels for new issues. The same for Issue-Enhancement - add Needs-Triage too.

Good call on adding Needs-Triage along with Issue-Enhancement for feature request issues.
For bug issues, does it make sense to add Issue-Question automatically? In my personal opinion, Issue-Question should be applied to those issues that are really just a question, and thus when applying this label, it means the issue has already been triaged.

Good call on adding Needs-Triage along with Issue-Enhancement for feature request issues.
For bug issues, does it make sense to add Issue-Question automatically? In my personal opinion, Issue-Question should be applied to those issues that are really just a question, and thus when applying this label, it means the issue has already been triaged.

In the case we should do the some for Issue-Enhancement :-)

Currently I set Issue-Question for all issues as a start point. New process is still not clear for me - who and how should process Needs-Triage? We could automatically set only Needs-Triage and after triage (or I could does this independently leaving removing Needs-Triage to WGs) manually set Issue-Question for minor issues, Issue-Bug for bugs and Issue-Enhancement for new functionality.

Issue-Enhancement is auto-set for issues that are opened using the Feature_Request.md template. I think that's explicit enough.

who and how should process

According to the WG doc, the corresponding WG should triage the issue, and Needs-Triage label should be removed after the triage.

Issue-Enhancement is auto-set for issues that are opened using the Feature_Request.md template. I think that's explicit enough.

Currently I have to decrease most of such issues to Issue-Question level because they are poorly justified.

According to the WG doc, the corresponding WG should triage the issue, and Needs-Triage label should be removed after the triage.

I would be happy if, from tomorrow, the working group members (who are now exclusively MSFT employees) have been doing this work on a daily basis. But I strongly doubt that it will be so tomorrow. Should I continue this work?

I would be happy if, from tomorrow, the working group members (who are now exclusively MSFT employees) have been doing this work on a daily basis. But I strongly doubt that it will be so tomorrow. Should I continue this work?

I'm going to do my WG duty starting from today 😄 I strongly believe you should be part of some of the WGs, given that you are a maintainer and also you have been doing the WG work for such a long time!
I left a comment in the WG PR https://github.com/PowerShell/PowerShell/pull/14603/files#r564015516

@iSazonov I will merge this PR for now. Let's continue the process discussion in the WG PR. We will see how it works.

@rjmholt It seems something is wrong with the CI 😕 Maybe just forcefully merge this one?

nothing is wrong with CI, just doesn't run on files in this folder.

That's good to know. Then I will just merge this PR.

Maybe set Needs-Triage label on all opened issues in the repo by script?