We used to not be able to close PRs directly, but now we can, so I assume this is as fine a way of doing so, if we want to. I don't think there's a policy against it or anything. Hyukjin how have you managed this one in the past? I don't mind it being automated if the idle time is long and it posts some friendly message about reopening if there is a material change in the proposed PR, the problem, or interest in merging it.
On Fri, Dec 6, 2019 at 11:20 AM Nicholas Chammas <nicholas.cham...@gmail.com> wrote: > That's true, we do use Actions today. I wonder if Apache Infra allows > Actions to close PRs vs. just updating commit statuses. I only ask because > I remember permissions were an issue in the past when discussing tooling > like this. > > In any case, I'd be happy to submit a PR adding this in if there are no > concerns. We can hash out the details on the PR. > > On Fri, Dec 6, 2019 at 11:08 AM Sean Owen <sro...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> I think we can add Actions, right? they're used for the newer tests in >> Github? >> I'm OK closing PRs inactive for a 'long time', where that's maybe 6-12 >> months or something. It's standard practice and doesn't mean it can't be >> reopened. >> Often the related JIRA should be closed as well but we have done that >> separately with bulk-close in the past. >> >> On Thu, Dec 5, 2019 at 3:24 PM Nicholas Chammas < >> nicholas.cham...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> It’s that topic again. 😄 >>> >>> We have almost 500 open PRs. A good chunk of them are more than a year >>> old. The oldest open PR dates to summer 2015. >>> >>> >>> https://github.com/apache/spark/pulls?q=is%3Apr+is%3Aopen+sort%3Acreated-asc >>> >>> GitHub has an Action for closing stale PRs. >>> >>> https://github.com/marketplace/actions/close-stale-issues >>> >>> What do folks think about deploying it? Does Apache Infra give us the >>> ability to even deploy a tool like this? >>> >>> Nick >>> >>
