One signal we can consider is whether a PR's author has been reviewing other people's PRs (perhaps with a recency filter as well). It's easy to compute and it rewards the behavior that shrinks the queue.
On 2026-06-10, 9:18 AM, "Jarek Potiuk" <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you can confirm the sender and know the content is safe. AVERTISSEMENT: Ce courrier électronique provient d’un expéditeur externe. Ne cliquez sur aucun lien et n’ouvrez aucune pièce jointe si vous ne pouvez pas confirmer l’identité de l’expéditeur et si vous n’êtes pas certain que le contenu ne présente aucun risque. Hi everyone, Building on Ash's recent discussion, I’d love to start a conversation about how we handle our open PRs. While we explore PR templates and instructions, I believe looking at our current data can help us find the best path forward together. I’ve been looking into the statistics from our last four weeks of triage (you can see the details here: https://gistpreview.github.io/?ff06225744d9386195510453190e354a <https://gistpreview.github.io/?ff06225744d9386195510453190e354a>), and I wanted to share some encouraging insights: - Out of 373 open PRs from non-maintainers, we’ve successfully identified 95 as Drafts. Most of these (70%) were moved to draft status during triage to help authors focus on fixes, which keeps our main queue much leaner. - We have 211 PRs "ready for maintainer review," meaning they pass all our CI and testing criteria. - Interestingly, about 108 of these are fully ready but haven't received a comment yet, and 23 are approved and just waiting for a final merge. The great news is that about 80% of our current triage actions are deterministic! We could potentially automate these into CI scripts, which would naturally clear about 100 items from our review queue. I’m more than happy to help set this up if you think it’s a good next step. I really value the human element in our community and want to make sure our contributors feel heard. Since many follow our criteria perfectly but still wait weeks for a response, I’d love to hear your creative ideas on how we can better support them and stay on top of these high-quality PRs. What do you all think? Best regards, Jarek
