Hi Wido, I have one comment on this topic. Some of those PRs are lying there because no one took the time to merge them (I have a couple like that) since they were not very important (I think it's the reason), fixing only a small glitch or improving an output. If we start to close the PRs because there isn't activity on them, we should be sure to treat all PRs equally in term on timeline when they arrive. Using the labels to sort them and make filtering easier would also be something important IMO. Today there are 200+ PRs but we cannot filter them and have not much idea on their status, except by checking if they are "mergeable". This should not conflict with the Jira tickets & discussion that happened previously.
Marco On Mon, Jul 24, 2017 at 10:22 AM, Wido den Hollander <w...@widodh.nl> wrote: > Hi, > > While writing this e-mail we have 191 Open Pull requests [0] on Github and > that number keeps hovering around ~200. > > We have a great number of PRs being merged, but a lot of code is old and > doesn't even merge anymore. > > My proposal would be that we close all PRs which didn't see any activity > in the last 3 months (Jun, July and May 2017) with the following message: > > "This Pull Request is being closed for not seeing any activity since May > 2017. > > The CloudStack project is in a transition from the Apache Foundation's Git > infrastructure to Github and due to that not all PRs we able to be tested > and/or merged. > > It's not our intention to say that we don't value the PR, but it's a way > to get a better overview of what needs to be merged. > > If you think closing this PR is a mistake, please add a comment and > re-open the PR! If you do that, could you please make sure that the PR > merges against the branch it was submitted against? > > Thank you very much for your understanding and cooperation!" > > How does that sound? > > Wido > > > [0]: https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pulls >
