ClSlaid commented on PR #1987:
URL:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-opendal/pull/1987#issuecomment-1508130488
> Indeed, but I think closing PRs with detailed, sincere explaination, is
acceptable.
I strongly support the idea of closing long responded PRs because I've once
created such one.
But I do agree closing `not responded` PRs is quite too strict, maybe
`inactive` PR is better.
Those inactive PRs often comes with:
- stale or unrelated changes:
for developers not familiar with git, some stale or unrelated changes
may present in the PR, making review hard and could break the code base. This
comes more severe when the code base is rapidly evolving with features and
fixes. Some important fixes may be incorrectly shadowed by those stale and
unrelated changes.
- Inconsistent changes:
open source contributors are seldom working full time on PRs, this may
lead to inconsistent changes and bugs.
OpenDAL is not very complex and most of the PR is quite straight forward.
Our PR got quick review and response from warm-hearted developers.
How about apply it to PRs that is inactive, and with no addition information
about the inactivity? This should be acceptable.
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
[email protected]
