On 21 September 2016 at 22:13, Andreas Mueller <t3k...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 09/19/2016 09:56 PM, Nelle Varoquaux wrote:
>>> Another bot-able tool might be pinging inactive PRs to ask if they're
>>> worked on, and labelling "Needs contributor" if there's no reply within n
> That kind of only works when the status is "waiting for changes",
> and not "waiting for reviews". I guess we could tag all old issues
> or use the new interface (though you said that's not scriptable yet?)
> So we would need to actually use the "needs reviews" tag and add an
> "waiting for changes" tag. And I guess the "waiting for changes" should be
> removed automatically when the author changed something and changed to
> "needs review"?
> Is there an API to access the "fixes #ISSUE" thing for auto-closing? Just
> mentioning an issue
> doesn't mean it's a PR to solve the issue.
>> If PRs are inactive, it might also be interesting to tag them as
>> easy_fix when there is little to do.
> That's much harder to automate though.
> I know that I often misjudge the amount that is left to do in a PR,
> not sure if bots are better at that than humans yet.
Bots wouldn't be able to do that, but I find that an hour now and then
scrolling throught old PR works pretty well :)
> Are there bots with LSTM support yet? ;)
> scikit-learn mailing list
scikit-learn mailing list