+0 I haven’t thought about the details, but it might improve our situation regarding pull requests. It’s a small reversible step, so I would support trying it. If it doesn’t help, we can change policy back again.
Julian > On Aug 22, 2024, at 10:59 AM, Ruben Q L <rube...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Thanks for opening the discussion, Michael. > +1 on the idea. > > > > On Thu, Aug 22, 2024 at 6:43 PM Michael Mior <mm...@apache.org> wrote: > >> Hi all, >> >> I know the better solution here is to have more people reviewing and >> merging PRs to keep momentum going. However, even when someone is engaged >> in trying to help merge a PR, sometimes the original author will disappear >> or changes become irrelevant over time. I think having a smaller number of >> open PRs can help keep things more manageable. The goal is that regardless >> of when the PR was opened, it should be kept open if there is still >> interest. But PRs which have been abandoned should be closed. >> >> I'm suggesting implementing (via GitHub Actions, e.g. >> https://github.com/actions/stale) a process that will automatically close >> PRs after some period of inactivity. This doesn't mean we lose any of the >> work. We can also have PRs automatically be reopened if there are any >> future comments. The idea would be that after X number of days, a comment >> is automatically posted and a label of "stale" is applied. Then after Y >> more days, the PR would be automatically closed. Any activity (more commits >> on the branch or comments) will remove the stale label and reset the clock. >> >> I'd propose implementing this with X=30 and Y=90. This gives four months >> for any activity to keep a PR alive. Again, if it is closed, no work is >> lost. But I think four months of no activity is a strong indicator that >> nothing is likely to move forward in the near future. I will note that if >> this policy were already in place, it would mean ~85% of our current open >> PRs would have been closed (if there was no intervention after the initial >> ping). >> >> Here's some configuration data from a few projects which have implemented >> this >> >> Apache Age, X=60, Y=14 >> Apache Airflow, X=45, Y=5 >> Apache Beam, X=60, Y=7 >> Apache ECharts, X=730,Y=7 >> Apache Iceberg, X=30, Y=7 >> Apache Kafka, X=90, Y=-1 (never automatically close) >> Apache Solr, X=60, Y=-1 >> Apache Spark, X=100,Y=0 >> Apache Superset, X=60, Y=7 >> >> -- >> Michael Mior >> mm...@apache.org >>
