Our backlog of open PRs is slowly creeping up. This isn't great because it allows contributions to slip through the cracks (which in turn possibly turns off new contributors). Perusing PRs I think things roughly fall into the following categories.
1. PRs are work in progress that never got completed but were left open (mostly by regular arrow contributors). 2. PR stalled because changes where requested and the PR author never responded. 3. PR stalled due to lack of consensus on approach/design. 4. PR is blocked on some external dependency (mostly these are PRs by regular arrow contributor). A straw-man proposal for handling these: 1. Regular arrow contributors, please close the PR if it isn't close to being ready and you aren't actively working on it. 2. I think we should start assigning reviewers who will have the responsibility of: a. Pinging contributor and working through the review with them. b. Closing out the PR in some form if there hasn't been activity in a 30 day period (either merging as is, making the necessary changes or closing the PR, and removing the tag from JIRA). 3. Same as 2, but bring the discussion to the mailing list and try to have a formal vote if necessary. 4. Same as 2, but tag the PR as blocked and the time window expands. The question comes up with how to manage assignment of PRs to reviewers. I am happy to try to triage any PRs older then a week (assuming some PRs will be closed quickly with the current ad-hoc process) and load balance between volunteers (it would be great to have a doc someplace where people can express there available bandwidth and which languages they feel comfortable with). Thoughts/other proposals? Thanks, Micah P.S. A very rough analysis of PR tags gives the following counts. 29 C++ 17 Python 8 Rust 7 WIP 7 Plasma 7 Java 5 R 4 Go 4 Flight
