Hi Nic,
In general, I think addressing this is a good idea. Some random thoughts
below:
Le 17/06/2025 à 12:40, Nic Crane a écrit :
I'd like to take the following actions:
Category: 1 - PRs - haven't been commented on or touched in the past 12
months (137 at present; 40% of open PRs)[1]
Classification: Possibly abandoned
Reason: Creates noise or impression the issue is being worked on
Response: Close these with the message "Closing because it has been
untouched for a year, which may be an indication it's not longer being
actively worked on. Feel free to re-open if it is still being worked on!"
Do contributors actually have the rights to reopen a PR of theirs? I
think so, but we should double-check.
Category: 2 - Issues - improvements that haven't been commented on in over
3 years (498; 12% if open issues)
Classification: May or may not still be things we'd like to implement in
future, unclear
Reason: Gives the impression that items are currently on someone's roadmap,
may prevent user making feature request for it
Reponse: Comment on these issues with warning that will be closed in 30
days if no comment saying otherwise. Close unanswered issues after 30 days.
Sounds good, but with a question: will the automatic comment be
reiterated later? In my experience, it's quite unnerving to have to
comment every XX days on an issue to prevent an auto-close.
Category: 3 - Issues - user questions with no ongoing conversation for over
12 months (107; 3% of open issues)[3]
Classification: Unclear if user still needs helps
Reason: Adds to repo noise
Reponse: Comment on these issues with warning that will be closed in 30
days if no comment saying otherwise. Close unanswered issues after 30 days.
Manually update to "improvement" if it's now a feature update or docs
change needed.
+1
Also, we should make the script doing this public somewhere. Perhaps in
the Arrow monorepo itself, somewhere under dev/ ?
Regards
Antoine.
