Hi everyone,
thanks for starting this discussion. I think, the flink-kubernetes and
flink repository are too different (age, size) to draw conclusions from
another. On a first thought, I am not a fan of having different processes
for different repositories inside the project.
The discussion remin
Hi gents,
Thanks for the stats Martjin, that valuable insight into the situation.
Having a large number of open, stale PRs can also result in a bad
contributor experience down the line, as in my opinion it can reach a point
where it discourages committers reviewing them as it starts to feel like a
We've had discussions about closing stale PRs several times in the past
and always rejected it.
I see no reason to change this.
If you want to close a PR, then do so while informing the contributor
about the reason.
On 14/09/2022 15:36, Martijn Visser wrote:
Hi Gabor,
I have my doubts: I th
Hi Gabor,
I have my doubts: I think the majority of the open PRs are not open because
of inactivity from the contributor, but I think the majority (at least for
the flink repository) are open because there are not enough reviews
occurring. If we actively mark those as stale and close them, I think
Hi Gabor,
Thanks for bringing this to our attention. I'd be happy to see such
automatism guarding our repos. We could start a trial period on the
operator repo I guess until we have the confidence it's a good thing. Are
you aware of this plugin being used at other ASF projects? Any pros/cons?
Che
Hi All,
As I see there is no action for stale PRs for flink and
flink-kubernetes-operator repos however almost 1k PRs are open.
I would like to suggest to add new stale PR action based on the following
github plugin:
https://github.com/marketplace/actions/close-stale-issues
I think the default v
