JIRAs should only be closed if the issue that they track is no longer relevant (either via being fixed or being determined to not be a problem). If a JIRA isn't being meaningfully worked on, it should be unassigned (in all cases, not just if there's an associated pull request that has not been worked on).
+1 on closing PRs with no action from the original author after some reasonable time frame (90 days is certainly reasonable; 30 might be too short) if the author has not responded to actionable feedback. On Wed, Aug 16, 2017 at 12:07 PM, Sourabh Bajaj < [email protected]> wrote: > Some projects I have seen close stale PRs after 30 days, saying "Closing > due to lack of activity, please feel free to re-open". > > On Wed, Aug 16, 2017 at 12:05 PM Ahmet Altay <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > Sounds like we have consensus. Since this is a new policy, I would > suggest > > picking the most flexible option for now (90 days) and we can tighten it > in > > the future. To answer Kenn's question, I do not know, how other projects > > handle this. I did a basic search but could not find a good answer. > > > > What mechanism can we use to close PRs, assuming that author will be out > of > > communication. We can push a commit with a "This closes #xyz #abc" > message. > > Is there another way to do this? > > > > Ahmet > > > > On Wed, Aug 16, 2017 at 4:32 AM, Aviem Zur <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > Makes sense to close after a long time of inactivity and no response, > and > > > as Kenn mentioned they can always re-open. > > > > > > On Wed, Aug 16, 2017 at 12:20 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré <[email protected] > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > If we consider the author, it makes sense. > > > > > > > > Regards > > > > JB > > > > > > > > On Aug 15, 2017, 01:29, at 01:29, Ted Yu <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > >The proposal makes sense. > > > > > > > > > >If the author of PR doesn't respond for 90 days, the PR is likely > out > > > > >of > > > > >sync with current repo. > > > > > > > > > >Cheers > > > > > > > > > >On Mon, Aug 14, 2017 at 5:27 PM, Ahmet Altay > <[email protected] > > > > > > > >wrote: > > > > > > > > > >> Hi all, > > > > >> > > > > >> Do we have an existing policy for handling stale PRs? If not could > > we > > > > >come > > > > >> up with one. We are getting close to 100 open PRs. Some of the > open > > > > >PRs > > > > >> have not been touched for a while, and if we exclude the pings the > > > > >number > > > > >> will be higher. > > > > >> > > > > >> For example, we could close PRs that have not been updated by the > > > > >original > > > > >> author for 90 days even after multiple attempts to reach them > (e.g. > > > > >[1], > > > > >> [2] are such PRs.) > > > > >> > > > > >> What do you think? > > > > >> > > > > >> Thank you, > > > > >> Ahmet > > > > >> > > > > >> [1] https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/1464 > > > > >> [2] https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/2949 > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >
