On 12/09/18 19:16, Sid Anand wrote: > A stale PR is defined by a policy -- for example, 60 days without any > movement on the PR.
Automatically closing such issues is not going to do anything to aid community building and is likely to actively damage such efforts. > Stale PRs would be bad experiences in general for community members, but > after no movement for 60 days, this is just about cleaning up PRs that are > not getting feedback from the committers or PR submitters. That is the wrong solution the problem. If reporters of issues are not responding to questions and there is genuinely nothing the community can do to progress the issue without their input then closing the issue is fair enough. But that should very much be the exception rather than the rule. In projects I am involved in I probably do that a handful of times a year. However, even in a good chunk of those cases, the main reason for the lack of response from the OP is that the community did not respond to the original report for an excessively long time. If the committers are not responding to issues in a timely manner then the solution is to start looking for more committers. Reporting an issue is often the first interaction someone new to the community has with the project. It should be treated as an opportunity to attract new members to the community and to grow the project. Mark > > -s > > On Wed, Sep 12, 2018 at 10:58 AM Dave Fisher <dave2w...@comcast.net> wrote: > >> Hi - >> >> I was pointing out a potential community problem which is what we are >> about here in the Incubator. >> >> On Sep 12, 2018, at 10:27 AM, Sid Anand <san...@apache.org> wrote: >> >> A stale PR has not activity for some length of time. >> https://github.com/probot/stale >> >> The policy file example shown on that link it pretty easy to follow, so >> I'll avoid pasting a wall of text into this email. >> >> This seems like a pretty valuable and much-needed piece of management-y >> software. Unfortunately, I was informed Apache Infra could not grant write >> perms to this GitHub plugin. I'd like to understand how we decide which >> plugins on GitHub get whitelisted? >> >> >> The Incubator does not make these decisions. The Apache Infrastructure >> team makes these. >> >> You can contact Infra - https://www.apache.org/dev/infra-contact >> >> Regards, >> Dave >> >> >> -s >> >> On Wed, Sep 12, 2018 at 7:39 AM Dave Fisher <dave2w...@comcast.net> wrote: >> >> Hi - >> >> What if the stale PR is from a new community member who is trying to make >> a contribution? Those should be handled by a committer with direct >> discussion. >> >> Regards, >> Dave >> >> Sent from my iPhone >> >> On Sep 11, 2018, at 7:40 PM, Hagay Lupesko <lupe...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> Im also interested in this PR policy automation. >> >> For Apache MXNet, there is no automation that I am aware of that handles >> that. And it can be super helpful in handling stale PRs... >> >> Hagay >> >> On Tue, Sep 11, 2018, 12:07 Sid Anand <san...@apache.org> wrote: >> >> Hi Folks! >> I wanted a policy-driven approach to automatically label, comment, and >> close inactive/stale PRs. Probot does this, but need some write perms to >> GitHub. >> >> https://github.com/probot/stale >> >> I just learned this is not possible per >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-17005 >> >> How are other projects solving this problem? And why is probot not on >> >> say >> >> an approved list of GitHub integrations? >> >> -s >> >> >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org >> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org >> >> >> >> > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
