+dev@beam / hi dev@flink / I saw this and forwarded on to dev@beam for consideration. There was general agreement that it was interesting so I thought I'd loop them together. I tried to wait until both threads had enough support that combining them wouldn't confuse things.
Beam would also be interested in this. One reference point is that we have a "merge-bot" [1] for the web site (on GitBox) that runs a Jekyll build and then merges a PR. The relevant bit is probably simply that we have a bot acting as @asfgit on GitHub [2]. Kenn [1] https://github.com/jasonkuster/merge-bot [2] https://github.com/apache/beam-site/pull/421#issuecomment-382150619 On Mon, May 14, 2018 at 5:58 AM Ufuk Celebi <u...@apache.org> wrote: > Hey Piotr, > > thanks for bringing this up. I really like this proposal and also saw > it work successfully at other projects. So +1 from my side. > > - I like the approach with a notification one week before > automatically closing the PR > - I think a bot will the best option as these kinds of things are > usually followed enthusiastically in the beginning but eventually > loose traction > > We can enable better integration with GitHub by using ASF GitBox > (https://gitbox.apache.org/setup/) but we should discuss that in a > separate thread. > > – Ufuk > > On Mon, May 14, 2018 at 12:04 PM, Piotr Nowojski > <pi...@data-artisans.com> wrote: > > Hey, > > > > We have lots of open pull requests and quite some of them are > stale/abandoned/inactive. Often such old PRs are impossible to merge due to > conflicts and it’s easier to just abandon and rewrite them. Especially > there are some PRs which original contributor created long time ago, > someone else wrote some comments/review and… that’s about it. Original > contributor never shown up again to respond to the comments. Regardless of > the reason such PRs are clogging the GitHub, making it difficult to keep > track of things and making it almost impossible to find a little bit old > (for example 3+ months) PRs that are still valid and waiting for reviews. > To do something like that, one would have to dig through tens or hundreds > of abandoned PRs. > > > > What I would like to propose is to agree on some inactivity dead line, > lets say 3 months. After crossing such deadline, PRs should be > marked/commented as “stale”, with information like: > > > > “This pull request has been marked as stale due to 3 months of > inactivity. It will be closed in 1 week if no further activity occurs. If > you think that’s incorrect or this pull request requires a review, please > simply write any comment.” > > > > Either we could just agree on such policy and enforce it manually (maybe > with some simple tooling, like a simple script to list inactive PRs - seems > like couple of lines in python by using PyGithub) or we could think about > automating this action. There are some bots that do exactly this (like this > one: https://github.com/probot/stale <https://github.com/probot/stale> ), > but probably they would need to be adopted to limitations of our Apache > repository (we can not add labels and we can not close the PRs via GitHub). > > > > What do you think about it? > > > > Piotrek >
