Re: [DISCUSS] Should we automatically close stale PRs?

[Viktor Somogyi-Vass <vi...@cloudera.com.INVALID>]

>One thing that might make sense to do maybe is to add frequent contributors
>with the "triage" role, so they could label PRs they reviewed and they can
>be taken by committers for a further review and potential merge. What do
>you think?

In addition to labeling commits as stale I think the opposite as said above
(triage and label new PRs) is a very good idea too. We often try to review
each other's commits in the team before/after publishing them upstream.
Such commits I think would filter the incoming PRs well and make overall
quality better.
Would it be possible to do this? I'd be happy to be triager.

On Sun, Feb 27, 2022 at 4:23 AM Guozhang Wang <wa...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hey David,
>
> Just reviving on this thread, do you have some final decision on this now
> with all the feedbacks received so far?
>
> On Sun, Feb 13, 2022 at 8:41 PM Ismael Juma <is...@juma.me.uk> wrote:
>
> > Hi David,
> >
> > I think it's a good idea to use the bot for auto closing stale PRs. The
> > ideal flow would be:
> >
> > 1. Write a comment and add stale label
> > 2. If user responds saying that the PR is still valid, the stale label is
> > removed
> > 3. Otherwise, the PR is closed
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Ismael
> >
> > On Sat, Feb 5, 2022, 2:22 AM David Jacot <da...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> > > Hi team,
> > >
> > > I find our ever growing back of PRs a little frustrating, don't
> > > you? I just made a pass over all the list and a huge chunk
> > > of the PRs are abandoned, outdated or irrelevant with the
> > > current code base. For instance, we still have PRs opened
> > > back in 2015.
> > >
> > > There is not a Github Action [1] for automatically marking
> > > PRs as stale and to automatically close them as well. How
> > > would the community feel about enabling this? I think that
> > > we could mark a PR as stable after one year and close it
> > > a month after if there are no new activities. Reopening a
> > > closed PR is really easy so there is no real arm is closing
> > > it.
> > >
> > > [1] https://github.com/actions/stale
> > >
> >
>
>
> --
> -- Guozhang
>

Re: [DISCUSS] Should we automatically close stale PRs?

[Divij Vaidya <di...@gmail.com>]

FWIW, I think the "triaged" label is a great idea for reducing the
workload on committers. It would perhaps help in reducing our open PR count
and increase the velocity of contributions to the project.

--
Divij Vaidya



On Wed, Jun 8, 2022 at 3:49 PM Viktor Somogyi-Vass
<vi...@cloudera.com.invalid> wrote:

> >One thing that might make sense to do maybe is to add frequent
> contributors
> >with the "triage" role, so they could label PRs they reviewed and they can
> >be taken by committers for a further review and potential merge. What do
> >you think?
>
> In addition to labeling commits as stale I think the opposite as said above
> (triage and label new PRs) is a very good idea too. We often try to review
> each other's commits in the team before/after publishing them upstream.
> Such commits I think would filter the incoming PRs well and make overall
> quality better.
> Would it be possible to do this? I'd be happy to be triager.
>
> On Sun, Feb 27, 2022 at 4:23 AM Guozhang Wang <wa...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Hey David,
> >
> > Just reviving on this thread, do you have some final decision on this now
> > with all the feedbacks received so far?
> >
> > On Sun, Feb 13, 2022 at 8:41 PM Ismael Juma <is...@juma.me.uk> wrote:
> >
> > > Hi David,
> > >
> > > I think it's a good idea to use the bot for auto closing stale PRs. The
> > > ideal flow would be:
> > >
> > > 1. Write a comment and add stale label
> > > 2. If user responds saying that the PR is still valid, the stale label
> is
> > > removed
> > > 3. Otherwise, the PR is closed
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Ismael
> > >
> > > On Sat, Feb 5, 2022, 2:22 AM David Jacot <da...@apache.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi team,
> > > >
> > > > I find our ever growing back of PRs a little frustrating, don't
> > > > you? I just made a pass over all the list and a huge chunk
> > > > of the PRs are abandoned, outdated or irrelevant with the
> > > > current code base. For instance, we still have PRs opened
> > > > back in 2015.
> > > >
> > > > There is not a Github Action [1] for automatically marking
> > > > PRs as stale and to automatically close them as well. How
> > > > would the community feel about enabling this? I think that
> > > > we could mark a PR as stable after one year and close it
> > > > a month after if there are no new activities. Reopening a
> > > > closed PR is really easy so there is no real arm is closing
> > > > it.
> > > >
> > > > [1] https://github.com/actions/stale
> > > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > -- Guozhang
> >
>