New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
[RFC] Give stale PRs 2 weeks to show signs of life #36253
Comments
I think first of all we should remove the obsolete PRs, i.e. Those PRs whose newer versions of the package have been accepted already. Then, we should either take over the PRs opened by ghost or close them. Then, we should do what has been mentioned above. Also, I think the wait time should be increased a bit. Three weeks, maybe? |
The obsolete PRs are for the most part closed, as tracked in #36116. Both remaining ones have unmerged patches/fixes. The libsigrok one is has a better fix in #36144, but it is yet to be known if the binfmt one is actually needed. |
I'm not a fan of closing PRs just because of inactivity because it helps others to build upon these. |
People can still build upon closed PRs, they don't just disappear once closed. The inactive label can be used on closed PRs to differentiate closed=rejected and closed=stale |
@tibequadorian Closing PRs doesn't block anyone from discussing those PRs, nor does it make the PR's content disappear. It all remains there for anyone else to build upon, just without the immense strain on the backlog. If anything, an open PR can discourage others from making new and updated PRs for the same things. And as Abby said, the label doesn't have to be removed from PRs once they are closed for inactivity, and the whole process involves sending a comment explaining why the PR got closed. |
I know the content doesn't disappear but the list of closed PRs (which is 40x bigger and growing) is usually not considered when searching for a useful PR to build upon. Not least because GitHub filters for open PRs automatically. I'd rather just mark them as inactive and keep them open as long as they are useful to others. |
It seems to me it would be more helpful to direct users to the full search, or accept that most of them (especially the new packages) don't meet the quality requirements (of package and or PR), on top of being outdated, and wouldn't be a good base for new PRs. Keep in mind it's not "the old PRs" but inactive PRs which this target; the old but still active PRs generally meet quality requirements and are kept updated by their authors. |
Yet another problem with those PRs: the Github action logs are long gone, meaning we can't even know what the failures were |
... then nuke the ones that didn't.
Rationale
The backlog is enormous, scary, and full of PRs that don't meet quality requirements, are waiting (for months) for requested changes, and/or have generally been abandoned. There's even PRs that no longer have an author (#29665, #30909).
This idea was mentioned multiple times in the IRC channel by multiple people, with a positive response.
How
gh pr list -L 2000 -S 'updated:<=2021-09-20' > file.tsv
The issue number is the first column
inactive
tagThis part could be done automatically if searching for
label:inactive updated:<=[date of script run]T[time of script run]
, although it will miss PRs where the activity was just "I don't use void anymore". I suspect this will not be a big problem considering how dead the backlog is.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: