Re: Auto-closing old PRs

[Dylan Wylie <dy...@gmail.com>]

Yeah, any comments/commits/activity on a PR reset the threshold.

e.g. https://github.com/apache/incubator-druid/pull/6768



On Thu, 28 Feb 2019 at 23:05, Gian Merlino <gi...@apache.org> wrote:

> I thought the bot uses a threshold of 60 days with absolutely no activity
> (not 60 days since opening or anything like that); that does seem like a
> long time to me for a PR to be totally silent. Especially considering the
> bot won't close the PR right away, but will make a comment first asking if
> anyone is still interested.
>
> On Thu, Feb 28, 2019 at 2:57 PM Roman Leventov <le...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > IMO, 60 days is nothing in Druid terms. I suggest making it 6 months.
> >
> > On Thu, 28 Feb 2019 at 07:36, Dylan Wylie <dy...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> > > Infra got this switched on this morning for the repository, anyone who
> > gets
> > > email notifications would have unfortunately been spammed as the bot
> > worked
> > > through all our old PRs. This will likely happen again in 7 days when
> it
> > > closes all the PRs that remain inactive.
> > >
> > > For anyone wanting to clean up those mails the following search string
> > > should take return all those mails in GMail for bulk operations
> > >
> > > "from:(stale[bot]) apache/incubator-druid"
> > >
> > > On Mon, 11 Feb 2019 at 22:15, Gian Merlino <gi...@apache.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > > IMO it makes sense to keep PRs open if they have a milestone or have
> a
> > > > Security or Bug label. 60 days with no activity as a threshold sounds
> > > good
> > > > to me - it's a pretty long time.
> > > >
> > > > On Mon, Feb 11, 2019 at 11:22 AM Jihoon Son <ji...@apache.org>
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Hi Dylan, thank you for starting a discussion.
> > > > >
> > > > > I think this is a good idea. We currently have 159 open PRs, but
> many
> > > PRs
> > > > > have gone too stale. For example, the earliest PR was opened on Jan
> > 26,
> > > > > 2016.
> > > > > I do believe that this would help us to focus on more active PRs
> and
> > > > > encourage more people to get involved in the review process.
> > > > >
> > > > > The policy for the timeline looks good to me. But, for milestone,
> we
> > > can
> > > > > assign it on any PRs and remove it later if it shouldn't block the
> > > > release.
> > > > > (See
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/371ffb06447debb93eec01863802aab13a08a9c37356466e6750c007@%3Cdev.druid.apache.org%3E
> > > > > and
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/b9cd3aaf2d01801751f16ee0b2beb2cebc39e2a42160ffb268dc6918@%3Cdev.druid.apache.org%3E
> > > > > for the discussion of the milestone policy).
> > > > >
> > > > > I think we should make bug PRs to be not auto-closed rather than
> the
> > > ones
> > > > > assigned a milestone.
> > > > >
> > > > > Best,
> > > > > Jihoon
> > > > >
> > > > > On Mon, Feb 11, 2019 at 8:27 AM Dylan Wylie <dylanwylie@apache.org
> >
> > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Hey folks,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > What are opinions on automatically closing old pull requests?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > There's a lot that our outdated and abandoned. I think some sort
> of
> > > > > > automated process will tidy away those that are truly abandoned
> > while
> > > > > > highlighting those that aren't by encouraging their authors to
> poke
> > > > > > committers for review.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I've taken Apache Beam's stalebot configuration and adjusted it
> > > > slightly
> > > > > > here - https://github.com/apache/incubator-druid/pull/7031
> > > > > >
> > > > > > This will:
> > > > > > - Leave a comment and mark PRs as stale when they haven't had any
> > > > > activity
> > > > > > for 60 days.
> > > > > > - After a further 7 days of no activity the PR will be closed.
> > > > > > - Ignore any PR that has the label "Security" or a milestone
> > > assigned.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I've left issues out for now but open to suggestions on the
> > timelines
> > > > for
> > > > > > those if we were to enact a similar process.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Best regards,
> > > > > > Dylan
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Re: Auto-closing old PRs

[Furkan KAMACI <fu...@gmail.com>]

Hi,

I think that 60 days without "any" activity seems reasonable for Druid.

Kind Regards,
Furkan KAMACI

On Fri, Mar 1, 2019 at 5:42 PM Dylan Wylie <dy...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Yeah, any comments/commits/activity on a PR reset the threshold.
>
> e.g. https://github.com/apache/incubator-druid/pull/6768
>
>
>
> On Thu, 28 Feb 2019 at 23:05, Gian Merlino <gi...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > I thought the bot uses a threshold of 60 days with absolutely no activity
> > (not 60 days since opening or anything like that); that does seem like a
> > long time to me for a PR to be totally silent. Especially considering the
> > bot won't close the PR right away, but will make a comment first asking
> if
> > anyone is still interested.
> >
> > On Thu, Feb 28, 2019 at 2:57 PM Roman Leventov <le...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > IMO, 60 days is nothing in Druid terms. I suggest making it 6 months.
> > >
> > > On Thu, 28 Feb 2019 at 07:36, Dylan Wylie <dy...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Infra got this switched on this morning for the repository, anyone
> who
> > > gets
> > > > email notifications would have unfortunately been spammed as the bot
> > > worked
> > > > through all our old PRs. This will likely happen again in 7 days when
> > it
> > > > closes all the PRs that remain inactive.
> > > >
> > > > For anyone wanting to clean up those mails the following search
> string
> > > > should take return all those mails in GMail for bulk operations
> > > >
> > > > "from:(stale[bot]) apache/incubator-druid"
> > > >
> > > > On Mon, 11 Feb 2019 at 22:15, Gian Merlino <gi...@apache.org> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > IMO it makes sense to keep PRs open if they have a milestone or
> have
> > a
> > > > > Security or Bug label. 60 days with no activity as a threshold
> sounds
> > > > good
> > > > > to me - it's a pretty long time.
> > > > >
> > > > > On Mon, Feb 11, 2019 at 11:22 AM Jihoon Son <ji...@apache.org>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Hi Dylan, thank you for starting a discussion.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I think this is a good idea. We currently have 159 open PRs, but
> > many
> > > > PRs
> > > > > > have gone too stale. For example, the earliest PR was opened on
> Jan
> > > 26,
> > > > > > 2016.
> > > > > > I do believe that this would help us to focus on more active PRs
> > and
> > > > > > encourage more people to get involved in the review process.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The policy for the timeline looks good to me. But, for milestone,
> > we
> > > > can
> > > > > > assign it on any PRs and remove it later if it shouldn't block
> the
> > > > > release.
> > > > > > (See
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/371ffb06447debb93eec01863802aab13a08a9c37356466e6750c007@%3Cdev.druid.apache.org%3E
> > > > > > and
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/b9cd3aaf2d01801751f16ee0b2beb2cebc39e2a42160ffb268dc6918@%3Cdev.druid.apache.org%3E
> > > > > > for the discussion of the milestone policy).
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I think we should make bug PRs to be not auto-closed rather than
> > the
> > > > ones
> > > > > > assigned a milestone.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Best,
> > > > > > Jihoon
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Mon, Feb 11, 2019 at 8:27 AM Dylan Wylie <
> dylanwylie@apache.org
> > >
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Hey folks,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > What are opinions on automatically closing old pull requests?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > There's a lot that our outdated and abandoned. I think some
> sort
> > of
> > > > > > > automated process will tidy away those that are truly abandoned
> > > while
> > > > > > > highlighting those that aren't by encouraging their authors to
> > poke
> > > > > > > committers for review.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I've taken Apache Beam's stalebot configuration and adjusted it
> > > > > slightly
> > > > > > > here - https://github.com/apache/incubator-druid/pull/7031
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > This will:
> > > > > > > - Leave a comment and mark PRs as stale when they haven't had
> any
> > > > > > activity
> > > > > > > for 60 days.
> > > > > > > - After a further 7 days of no activity the PR will be closed.
> > > > > > > - Ignore any PR that has the label "Security" or a milestone
> > > > assigned.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I've left issues out for now but open to suggestions on the
> > > timelines
> > > > > for
> > > > > > > those if we were to enact a similar process.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Best regards,
> > > > > > > Dylan
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>