Of course, changing the workflow cannot magically increase the bandwidth to handle stale issues. That is what the triage guide wants to encourage committers to practice. But such a move can reduce the frustrating experience and explicitly express who is responsible for taking the next action to nudge the conversation.
Best, tison. tison <wander4...@gmail.com> 于2023年5月14日周日 15:28写道： > Hi devs, > > Recently, I have handled a large number of stale issues and noticed that > periodically notifying users that "the issue is stale" without any human > reaction can be a frustrating experience, e.g., ISSUE-13925[1]. > > Learning from the INFRA JIRA project experience, I propose we replace the > stale bot with a ping-pong workflow. That is - > > ping - Labeling waiting-for-reviewer on issue created and commented by > non-committers > pong - Labeling waiting-for-user on issue responded by committers > > Here is a demo implementation[2] you can refer to and you can try the > workflow in my fork[3]. > > Previous references - > > * The triage guide[4] > * [DISCUSS] Does stale bot make value for you?[5] > * [COMMITTER ATTENTION] You can close stale issues as not planned [6] > > Looking forward to your feedback :D > > Best, > tison. > > [1] https://github.com/apache/pulsar/issues/13925 > [2] https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/20319 > [3] https://github.com/tisonkun/pulsar > [4] https://pulsar.apache.org/contribute/develop-triage > [5] https://lists.apache.org/thread/tv774jqohdpx8x0dymsskrd90xwwfvgp > [6] https://lists.apache.org/thread/x2c7xod8y0wvh14nsb6bknf0dq3r9gls > >
