Thanks Andrew - that is helpful and makes much more sense as a CI job. I've opened https://github.com/apache/arrow/pull/46904 so if anyone has thoughts on messaging or grace period before closing, perhaps let's continue the discussion there.
On Mon, 23 Jun 2025 at 14:55, Andrew Lamb <al...@influxdata.com> wrote: > In case it is helpful, something we have found that works well in > DataFusion is: > > 1. Close stale PRs (60 days with no activity with a 7 day grace period) > 2. Does not old issues open -- because as people have pointed out above > just because an issue has had no activity doesn't mean it is not an issue. > > Here is the config we use:[1] > > Andrew > > [1]: > https://github.com/apache/datafusion/blob/main/.github/workflows/stale.yml > > > On Tue, Jun 17, 2025 at 6:41 AM Nic Crane <thisis...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Hey folks, > > > > I'm having a bit of a tidy up of the monorepo and would like to check in > > with folks before making a move. > > > > As of this moment, we have 345 open PRs and 4188 open issues. This > number > > was higher a week ago, but I've been making some effort to identify and > > close stale issues. > > > > There are many PRs which appear abandoned - no activity in the past 12 > > months or would require significant refactoring or resolving of git > > conflicts as the codebase has moved on significantly. > > > > 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!" > > > > 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. > > > > 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. > > > > Things I've intentionally left out here: > > 1. Bug tickets - I'd like to come back to these in a later discussion > > 2. Automation of this on a regular basis - if we go ahead, I'd like to > do a > > first pass and see how much response we get to closure warning tickets, > and > > then open a new discussion > > > > Any objections to this, or anything we'd like to discuss/change here? > > > > Thanks, > > > > Nic > > > > > > [1] > > > > > https://github.com/apache/arrow/issues?q=is%3Apr%20state%3Aopen%20%20updated%3A%3C%40today-1y > > [2] > > > > > https://github.com/apache/arrow/issues?q=is%3Aissue%20state%3Aopen%20%20updated%3A%3C%40today-3y%20label%3A%22Type%3A%20enhancement%22 > > [3] > > > > > https://github.com/apache/arrow/issues?q=is%3Aissue%20state%3Aopen%20%20updated%3A%3C%40today-1y%20label%3A%22Type%3A%20usage%22 > > >
