> On Jan 12, 2022, at 8:15 AM, PengHui Li <peng...@apache.org> wrote: > > Hi Pulsar Community, > > I want to start a discussion about introducing an icebox label that can be > added to > the issue or PR by pulsar bot automatically to help us can focus on the > active PRs > and issue. To avoid missing merge PRs, review PRs, triage issues.
I used the "status/stale" label for some old PRs that I closed. I think that "status/inactive” would be a more descriptive label than “icebox”. > > It looks like the following: > > 1. If the issue or PR is inactive for more than 4 weeks, the pulsar bot add > the icebox label > 2. If the issue or PR is re-active again, the pulsar bot remove the icebox > label > > How to determine the PR or issue is inactive? > > 1. No comments for 4 weeks. > 2. No code review(approve, comment, or change request) for 4 weeks. > 3. No commits for 4 weeks. > 4. No description update for 4 weeks. Can the time period be made a configuration parameter to make it easy to adjust? > > How to determine the PR or issue is re-inactive? > > With the icebox label first and: > > 1. New comment added > 2. New commits pushed > 3. Description updated > 4. New code review updates > > Note: all the approved PRs we should not add the icebox label > > This will help us to focus on the active issues and PRs so that we can > track the active issues and PRs better first. After we get this part done > (maybe keep active opened PR under 20 and active opened issue under 50?), > we can move forward to continue to handle the stale PRs (already discussed > in https://lists.apache.org/thread/k7lyw0q0fyc729w0fqlj5vqng5ny63f2). Great initiative! +1 All the best, Dave > > Thanks, > Penghui
