For reference, this is the older staleness discussion: https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/d53bee8431776f38ebaf8f5678b1ffd9513cd65ce15d821bbdca95aa@%3Cdev.flink.apache.org%3E <https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/d53bee8431776f38ebaf8f5678b1ffd9513cd65ce15d821bbdca95aa@%3Cdev.flink.apache.org%3E>
My main arguments for automatic closing of PRs are: - This will eventually close out old, stale PRs, making the number we see in Github better reflect the actual state - The bot will remind both reviewers and contributors that they have to be active on a PR, I found that useful on some PRs that I had open at Beam Aljoscha > On 10. Jan 2019, at 11:21, Chesnay Schepler <ches...@apache.org> wrote: > > Without any new argument for doing so, I'm still against it. > > On 10.01.2019 09:54, Aljoscha Krettek wrote: >> Hi, >> >> I know we had similar discussions in the past but I’d like to bring up this >> topic again. >> >> What do you think about adding a stale bot >> (https://probot.github.io/apps/stale/ >> <https://probot.github.io/apps/stale/>) to our Github Repo? This would >> automatically nag about stale PRs and close them after a (configurable) time >> of inactivity. This would do two things: >> >> (1) Clean up old PRs that truly are outdated and stale >> (2) Remind both contributor and reviewers about PRs that are still good and >> are on the verge of getting stale, thus potentially speeding up review or >> facilitating it in the first place >> >> Best, >> Aljoscha > >
