Maxim, Quite a nice idea. Could we go even further? Add a comment to each 1-2 year old PR asking if the author could close it (most likely with help of some automation). As I know GitHub sends emails with PR comments to authors.
чт, 25 июл. 2019 г. в 13:05, Dmitriy Pavlov <dpav...@apache.org>: > > Folks, please close not needed PRs. > > I don't have contact with Pyatkov & dkarachentsev. Folks, please step in. > Also, feel free to reopen PRs if you still want change to be merged. > > чт, 25 июл. 2019 г. в 12:39, Maxim Muzafarov <maxmu...@gmail.com>: > > > Folks, > > > > Can we contact with some members manually and ask them to close unused > > PRs? Most of the users are active community members, so I think they > > will respond quite fast. > > > > I've briefly checked GitHub: > > > > dkarachentsev - 62 opened PRs > > ilantukh - 58 opened PRs > > dgovorukhin - 44 opened PRs > > mcherkasov - 23 opened PRs > > ascherbakoff - 22 opened PRs > > vldpyatkov - 21 opened PRs > > > > On Thu, 25 Jul 2019 at 12:28, Dmitriy Pavlov <dpav...@apache.org> wrote: > > > > > > Hi Alexey, > > > > > > second need it to check all open PRs from community members for fixes, > > > which could be merged to Ignite codebase. > > > > > > Which is why I'm not so sure that we should automatically close. I ask > > > everyone to close their PRs, and I manually double-check PRs remained > > > opened. > > > > > > The third need is to automatically tests all opened PRs and provide visas > > > to every PR we have. In case we have PRs with 0 blockers we should take > > it > > > into review process. No all newcomers aware of TC Bot, so I would like to > > > automate this process as much as possible. > > > > > > Sincerely, > > > Dmitriy Pavlov > > > > > > чт, 25 июл. 2019 г. в 12:22, Alexey Zinoviev <zaleslaw....@gmail.com>: > > > > > > > The long period totally reduces the discontent and outrage of community > > > > members (if you reduce to 2-6 weeks it could be intersected with human > > > > events of most part of contributors like vacation, birthdays, wedding, > > spam > > > > filters and etc.), believe me (I have the same experience as I > > mentioned) > > > > > > > > From the other hand, what the real reason to reduce it to the shorter > > > > period? Bot needs? Robot needs? > > > > Robot could wait, I hope:) > > > > > > > > чт, 25 июл. 2019 г. в 14:08, Павлухин Иван <vololo...@gmail.com>: > > > > > > > > > Alexey, > > > > > > > > > > Yep, I imagined a similar procedure in my mind. Just curious, why do > > > > > you think that a period before actions are taken should be so long > > > > > (3-6 months)?. > > > > > > > > > > чт, 25 июл. 2019 г. в 11:55, Alexey Zinoviev <zaleslaw....@gmail.com > > >: > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Igniters, I have one suggestion > > > > > > > > > > > > If a most of commiters will support idea of automatic "cleaning", > > we > > > > > should > > > > > > provide next options > > > > > > > > > > > > - declare a long period for putting labels or leaving comments > > for > > > > > > useful PRs from their authors (about 3-6 months) > > > > > > - generate notifications for all authors of all PRs with > > > > clarification > > > > > > of our goals > > > > > > - every month reminder in dev-list and via e-mail to each PR's > > > > author > > > > > > > > > > > > The best way, of course, the closing by our hands in each module > > and > > > > area > > > > > > with tags "obsolete" or something else. > > > > > > > > > > > > P.S. I was in the same situation in Open Street Map community and > > the > > > > > > principles for automated cleaning were the same like suggested by > > > > myself > > > > > > above > > > > > > > > > > > > I hope that we will be careful with our community > > > > > > > > > > > > чт, 25 июл. 2019 г. в 13:23, Dmitriy Pavlov <dpav...@apache.org>: > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nikolay, committer could after setting up a link between GH & > > Apache > > > > > > > accounts. > > > > > > > https://gitbox.apache.org/setup/ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > чт, 25 июл. 2019 г. в 11:17, Nikolay Izhikov < > > nizhi...@apache.org>: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Yes. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Do someone have permission to close my(or any other > > contributor) PR > > > > > to > > > > > > > > apache/ignite? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > В Чт, 25/07/2019 в 11:05 +0300, Павлухин Иван пишет: > > > > > > > > > NIkolay, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Do you mean technical ability? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > чт, 25 июл. 2019 г. в 10:33, Nikolay Izhikov < > > > > nizhi...@apache.org > > > > > >: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hello, Ivan. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Do we have the ability to close PRs from other > > contributors? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > В Чт, 25/07/2019 в 09:12 +0300, Павлухин Иван пишет: > > > > > > > > > > > Igniters, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I would like to resume a discussion about PRs cleanup. > > > > > > > Additionally > > > > > > > > > > > to concerns provided earlier some TC Bot operations are > > > > slowed > > > > > down > > > > > > > > > > > due to a huge amount of open PRs. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > As time has passed, I ask you all again to share an > > opinion > > > > > about > > > > > > > > > > > centralized cleanup of obsolete PRs. Also, a precise > > criteria > > > > > to > > > > > > > > > > > consider PR as obsolete is a subject for dicsussion as > > well. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > чт, 13 дек. 2018 г. в 11:55, Petr Ivanov < > > > > mr.wei...@gmail.com > > > > > >: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 11 Dec 2018, at 10:10, Nikolay Izhikov < > > > > > nizhi...@apache.org > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hello, Ivan. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Personally, I keep my PR's clear. > > > > > > > > > > > > > So, I don't have dozens of opened PR. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > But, I don't support Dmitriy proposal for several > > > > reasons: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1. We introduce some new, not required, level of > > > > > bureaucracy. > > > > > > > > > > > > > From my experience - not required bureaucracy is a > > BAD > > > > > thing. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2. We spread our work pattern to whole community. > > > > > > > > > > > > > I believe there are many patterns of dealing with > > *YOUR > > > > > OWN* > > > > > > > PRs. > > > > > > > > > > > > > Some of them can lead to dozens of opened PRs to > > master. > > > > > > > > > > > > > Whats wrong with it? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 3. I dont' see any issues with many opened PRs. > > > > > > > > > > > > > What problem we trying to solve? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > But I see. > > > > > > > > > > > > Lots of opened PRs (and obsolete branches as well) > > consumes > > > > > huge > > > > > > > > amount of data and time when TC performs changes detect > > operations > > > > > (every > > > > > > > > minute, BTW). > > > > > > > > > > > > Also, IMO, ORDER is not an unnecessary level of > > > > bureaucracy, > > > > > but > > > > > > > > part of the project development workflow in area of cleaning > > up and > > > > > > > keeping > > > > > > > > everything fresh and actual. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 4. Closing abanodned PRs doesn't force anybody to > > review > > > > > the > > > > > > > > rest. > > > > > > > > > > > > > Instead of ordering something to one way or another, > > > > let's > > > > > > > solve > > > > > > > > real problem: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > - help the community doing PR review. > > > > > > > > > > > > > - fixing failing tests. > > > > > > > > > > > > > - introducing new code inspections to make our > > code > > > > > base > > > > > > > > clear. > > > > > > > > > > > > > - making Ignite improvements > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 5. I don't see how our numbers differs from other > > Apache > > > > > > > projects > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Apache Kafka - 533 PR opened. > > > > > > > > > > > > > Apache Spark - 484 PR opened. > > > > > > > > > > > > > Apache Flink - 430 PR opened. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > В Вт, 11/12/2018 в 09:24 +0300, Pavel Tupitsyn пишет: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Agree with Dmitriy. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > We use GitHub PRs in our workflow, therefore we > > should > > > > > keep > > > > > > > > them in order. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > We can close PRs that refer to closed tickets, > > this can > > > > > be > > > > > > > > done with a > > > > > > > > > > > > > > simple script. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, Dec 11, 2018 at 9:15 AM Павлухин Иван < > > > > > > > > vololo...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nikolay, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I must say that when I first saw 1K+ open PRs my > > > > first > > > > > > > > thought was > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > that something was wrong with a review process. > > In my > > > > > mind > > > > > > > > in not very > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > big project open PR list can reflect very well > > the > > > > real > > > > > > > work > > > > > > > > in > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > progress. For bigger projects things become more > > > > > > > complicated. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dmitriy, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Do you have some cleanup automation in mind? > > > > > Immediately I > > > > > > > > think that > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > it is fully safe to close all PRs that were not > > > > touched > > > > > > > more > > > > > > > > than a > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > year. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > пн, 10 дек. 2018 г. в 20:01, Dmitriy Pavlov < > > > > > > > > dpav...@apache.org>: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The main concern is related to chances that > > > > newcomer > > > > > will > > > > > > > > have to obtain > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > a > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > review support from the community. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Actually, a lot of people doing their best to > > > > > provide a > > > > > > > > feedback to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > newcomers, and count of issues still in PA > > state > > > > goes > > > > > > > down > > > > > > > > (84 is a > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > relatively small count of issues in PA state). > > But > > > > > 1428 > > > > > > > > PRs may imply we > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > don't review here, as we have tons of > > incomplete > > > > PRs. > > > > > > > > Actually, most of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > these PRs were merged (but not using > > > > > > > > ./apply-pull-request.sh script, but > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > manually, without reference to PRs). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Another benefit of revising this list, if > > there are > > > > > any > > > > > > > > changes which > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > were not accomplished with a proper ticket > > with PA > > > > > > > status, > > > > > > > > we will > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > identify > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > a number of additional contributions to be > > applied > > > > > to the > > > > > > > > codebase. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > пн, 10 дек. 2018 г. в 19:53, Nikolay Izhikov < > > > > > > > > nizhi...@apache.org>: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hello, Dmitriy. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > What, exactly concerns newcomers? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > What is wrong with opened PR? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > How project will benefit from closed PR? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The same proposal is related to IEP > > statuses. > > > > If > > > > > you > > > > > > > > were involved > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > in an > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > IEP, please validate its status > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > +1. We should maintain IEP description up to > > > > date. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > пн, 10 дек. 2018 г., 19:15 Dmitriy Pavlov > > > > > > > > dpav...@apache.org: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Igniters, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Newcomers to Apache Ignite sometimes became > > > > > concerned > > > > > > > > about many > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > open PRs > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > in the project. Apache Ignite TC Bot also > > > > > performs > > > > > > > > runs checks with > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > a PR > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > open. Apache Ignite pulls list > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://github.com/apache/ignite/pulls > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > contains > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1442 PRs open while only 84 issues are > > waiting > > > > > for > > > > > > > > review. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Could you please verify the list of your > > PRs in > > > > > > > Apache > > > > > > > > Ignite > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://github.com/pulls and close every > > not > > > > > > > > needed/already merged > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > change? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The same proposal is related to IEP > > statuses. > > > > If > > > > > you > > > > > > > > were involved > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > in an > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > IEP, please validate its status here > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Active+Proposals > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Please > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > set a correct state for your IEP, as well. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Should you have any questions, please don't > > > > > hesitate > > > > > > > > to ask here. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thank > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > you > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > in advance! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sincerely, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dmitriy Pavlov > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Best regards, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Ivan Pavlukhin > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > Best regards, > > > > > Ivan Pavlukhin > > > > > > > > > > > -- Best regards, Ivan Pavlukhin
