Hey Nicholas, In general we've been looking at these periodically (at least I have) and asking people to close out of date ones, but it's true that the list has gotten fairly large. We should probably have an expiry time of a few months and close them automatically. I agree that it's daunting to see so many open PRs.
Matei On August 25, 2014 at 9:03:09 PM, Nicholas Chammas (nicholas.cham...@gmail.com) wrote: Check this out: https://github.com/apache/spark/pulls?q=is%3Aopen+is%3Apr+sort%3Aupdated-asc We're hitting close to 300 open PRs. Those are the least recently updated ones. I think having a low number of stale (i.e. not recently updated) PRs is a good thing to shoot for. It doesn't leave contributors hanging (which feels bad for contributors), and reduces project clutter (which feels bad for maintainers/committers). What is our approach to tackling this problem? I think communicating and enforcing a clear policy on how stale PRs are handled might be a good way to reduce the number of stale PRs we have without making contributors feel rejected. I don't know what such a policy would look like, but it should be enforceable and "lightweight"--i.e. it shouldn't feel like a hammer used to reject people's work, but rather a necessary tool to keep the project's contributions relevant and manageable. Nick
