RE: [PROPOSAL] Closing PRs older than 1 month and without activity

[Boris Schrijver <bo...@pcextreme.nl>]

Remi,

Would it be possible to give the closed PRs which are not merged due to
inactivity or unfinished code-work a label? So the can be recognized when they
are closed? 

Best regards,

Boris Schrijver

TEL: +31633784542
MAIL: boris@pcextreme.nl

> 
>     On August 17, 2015 at 5:49 PM Somesh Naidu <So...@citrix.com>
> wrote:
> 
> 
>     +1
> 
>     Regards,
>     Somesh
> 
> 
>     -----Original Message-----
>     From: Remi Bergsma [mailto:RBergsma@schubergphilis.com]
>     Sent: Monday, August 17, 2015 10:26 AM
>     To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
>     Subject: [PROPOSAL] Closing PRs older than 1 month and without activity
> 
>     Hi all,
> 
>     There are several PRs that are quite old. They haven't been updated by
> their author for over a month and there was no response to comments made.
> 
>     As a RM, I want to maintain an as-short-as-possible list of PRs that is
> actively worked on. It is perfectly fine if a PR is open for a longer time, as
> long as it is actively maintained (or has a comment that explains why there is
> a delay). Long lists of open PRs don't give the impression we actively work on
> them and might keep people from contributing.
> 
>     Proposal:
>     Let's close PRs where the author did not respond for over a month.
> 
>     How?
>     For now, I'll manually select the PRs that I propose to close. Next, I
> make a PR with an empty commit that closes the PRs by triggering asfbot (as we
> cannot otherwise close PRs due to it being read-only for committers). By using
> a PR, it should be visible which PRs will get closed (after 2x LGTM and no
> -1). I’ll send an example PR with link to this thread after I've sent this
> e-mail.
> 
>     Work lost?
>     The work done in a PR is not lost by closing the PR! If someone wants to
> take over, this is how you can merge the work in a new branch (keeping author
> and commit hashes the same) and add more commits on top of it. You can then
> send it as a new PR.
> 
>     Example:
>     prId=12345
>     git fetch origin pull/${prId}/head:pr/${prId}
>     git merge --no-ff --log -m "Merging PR ${prId} and continuing the work"
> pr/${prId}
>     git commit --amend -s --allow-empty-message -m ''
> 
> 
>     Please let me know what you think: +1 or -1?
> 
>     If -1, what should we do instead?
> 
>     Regards,
>     Remi
> 

>

Re: [PROPOSAL] Closing PRs older than 1 month and without activity

[Remi Bergsma <RB...@schubergphilis.com>]

Hi Boris,

I like the idea, but this is a bit harder than it seems. We only have read-only access to GitHub, because it is a mirror of the actual git repo at Apache. That’s why we cannot simply close PRs etc. For the same reason, I cannot create labels or assign them. Not even for the PRs I submitted myself.

The closed PRs do get linked to the PR that closed them, because it was mentioned there. So, there’s a way to track them, just not as handy as a GitHub label would have been.

If anyone knows of a trick, let me know!

Regards,
Remi


> On 17 Aug 2015, at 18:09, Boris Schrijver <bo...@pcextreme.nl> wrote:
> 
> Remi,
> 
> Would it be possible to give the closed PRs which are not merged due to
> inactivity or unfinished code-work a label? So the can be recognized when they
> are closed? 
> 
> Best regards,
> 
> Boris Schrijver
> 
> TEL: +31633784542
> MAIL: boris@pcextreme.nl
> 
>> 
>>    On August 17, 2015 at 5:49 PM Somesh Naidu <So...@citrix.com>
>> wrote:
>> 
>> 
>>    +1
>> 
>>    Regards,
>>    Somesh
>> 
>> 
>>    -----Original Message-----
>>    From: Remi Bergsma [mailto:RBergsma@schubergphilis.com]
>>    Sent: Monday, August 17, 2015 10:26 AM
>>    To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
>>    Subject: [PROPOSAL] Closing PRs older than 1 month and without activity
>> 
>>    Hi all,
>> 
>>    There are several PRs that are quite old. They haven't been updated by
>> their author for over a month and there was no response to comments made.
>> 
>>    As a RM, I want to maintain an as-short-as-possible list of PRs that is
>> actively worked on. It is perfectly fine if a PR is open for a longer time, as
>> long as it is actively maintained (or has a comment that explains why there is
>> a delay). Long lists of open PRs don't give the impression we actively work on
>> them and might keep people from contributing.
>> 
>>    Proposal:
>>    Let's close PRs where the author did not respond for over a month.
>> 
>>    How?
>>    For now, I'll manually select the PRs that I propose to close. Next, I
>> make a PR with an empty commit that closes the PRs by triggering asfbot (as we
>> cannot otherwise close PRs due to it being read-only for committers). By using
>> a PR, it should be visible which PRs will get closed (after 2x LGTM and no
>> -1). I’ll send an example PR with link to this thread after I've sent this
>> e-mail.
>> 
>>    Work lost?
>>    The work done in a PR is not lost by closing the PR! If someone wants to
>> take over, this is how you can merge the work in a new branch (keeping author
>> and commit hashes the same) and add more commits on top of it. You can then
>> send it as a new PR.
>> 
>>    Example:
>>    prId=12345
>>    git fetch origin pull/${prId}/head:pr/${prId}
>>    git merge --no-ff --log -m "Merging PR ${prId} and continuing the work"
>> pr/${prId}
>>    git commit --amend -s --allow-empty-message -m ''
>> 
>> 
>>    Please let me know what you think: +1 or -1?
>> 
>>    If -1, what should we do instead?
>> 
>>    Regards,
>>    Remi
>> 
>