Re: [DISCUSS] Bot for stale PRs on GitHub

(1) I agree with Aljoscha's line of arguing here. A staleness bot is quite the opposite of “sweeping things under the rug". A clear and automated message about the state of a PR provides good value to contributors, reviewers, and other people monitoring PRs. Asking committers to proactively close

Re: [DISCUSS] Bot for stale PRs on GitHub

@Chesnay I agree that we did not handle PRs well at all in the past and we need to change more things than adding a stale bot to address them. I think, however, that a state bot is one piece of the solution for this because it makes the staleness of PRs more apparent. Plus, it will clean up

Re: [DISCUSS] Bot for stale PRs on GitHub

I agree with Chesnay here. How about introducing a bot just to tag the stale PRs, not close them. Then we can get the numbers of how many stale PRs in there, and go farther according to the numbers. Best, Congxian Timo Walther 于2019年1月14日周一 下午10:30写道： > I totally agree with Chesnay here. A bot

Re: [DISCUSS] Bot for stale PRs on GitHub

I totally agree with Chesnay here. A bot just treats the symptoms but not the cause. Maybe this needs no immediate action but we as committers should aim for a more honest communication. A lot of PRs have a reason for being stale but instead of communicating this reason we just don't touch

Re: [DISCUSS] Bot for stale PRs on GitHub

For reference, I'm still very much -1 on this. The short version is that auto-closing PRs hides symptoms that lead to stale PRs in the first place. As an example, consider flink-ml. We have a fair amount of open PRs targeted at this feature, that naturally this bot would close. What are they

Re: [DISCUSS] Bot for stale PRs on GitHub

+1 to try the bot out. Regarding auto closing the PR's, worst case a PR can be reopened in the event of a false positive. Whereas tagging stale PR's and requiring further human intervention isn't accomplishing much in the grand scheme of things. Cheers, Cameron -- On Mon, 14 Jan 2019 at

Re: [DISCUSS] Bot for stale PRs on GitHub

I think the automatic closing is an integral part, without it we would never close those stale PRs that we have lying around from 2015 and 2016. I would suggest to set the staleness interval quite high, say 2 months. Thus initially the bot would mainly close very old PRs and we shouldn’t even

Re: [DISCUSS] Bot for stale PRs on GitHub

+1 to the bot, but -1 to the automatically closing PR behavior. Can we just use the bolt to detect and tag the PR with stale flag and leave the decision whether to close the PR to the author? Best, Kurt On Sun, Jan 13, 2019 at 11:49 PM Kostas Kloudas wrote: > +1 to try the bot. > > It may,

Re: [DISCUSS] Bot for stale PRs on GitHub

+1 to try the bot. It may, at first, seem less empathetic than a solution that involves a human monitoring the PRs, but, in essence, having a PR stale for months (or even years) is at least as discouraging for a new contributor. Labels could further reduce the problem of noise, but I think that

Re: [DISCUSS] Bot for stale PRs on GitHub

> > Hey, > I agree with Timo here that we should introduce labels that will improve communication for PRs. IMHO this will show what percentage of PRs is really stale and not just abandoned due to the misunderstanding or other communication issues. Best Regards, Dom.

Re: [DISCUSS] Bot for stale PRs on GitHub

+1 to try the bot solution and see how it goes. On Fri, Jan 11, 2019 at 6:54 AM jincheng sun wrote: > +1 for the bot solution！ > and I think Timo‘s suggestion is very useful！ > Thanks， > Jincheng > > > Timo Walther 于2019年1月11日 周五22:44写道： > > > Thanks for bringing up this discussion again. +1

Re: [DISCUSS] Bot for stale PRs on GitHub

+1 for the bot solution！ and I think Timo‘s suggestion is very useful！ Thanks， Jincheng Timo Walther 于2019年1月11日 周五22:44写道： > Thanks for bringing up this discussion again. +1 for a bot solution. > However, we should discuss a good process for closing PRs. > > In many cases, PRs are closed not

Re: [DISCUSS] Bot for stale PRs on GitHub

Thanks for bringing up this discussion again. +1 for a bot solution. However, we should discuss a good process for closing PRs. In many cases, PRs are closed not because the contributor did not respond but because no committer prioritizes the PR high enough. Or the PR has issues that might

Re: [DISCUSS] Bot for stale PRs on GitHub

+1 for the stable bot, as it will help bring valuable PR out to be reviewed. > On Jan 11, 2019, at 6:26 PM, Driesprong, Fokko wrote: > > +1 I'm in favor of the Stale bot. > > We use the Stalebot at Apache Airflow as well, and it really helps smoothen > the reviewing process. Keep in mind that

Re: [DISCUSS] Bot for stale PRs on GitHub

+1 I'm in favor of the Stale bot. We use the Stalebot at Apache Airflow as well, and it really helps smoothen the reviewing process. Keep in mind that the number of PR's processed by the Stalebot is limited at each run. So you won't get a gazillion notifications, but just a few every couple of

Re: [DISCUSS] Bot for stale PRs on GitHub

> 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 I don't think we really want every contributor bumping their PR regularly. This will create unbearable noise and, if they actually update it, will

Re: [DISCUSS] Bot for stale PRs on GitHub

For reference, this is the older staleness discussion: https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/d53bee8431776f38ebaf8f5678b1ffd9513cd65ce15d821bbdca95aa@%3Cdev.flink.apache.org%3E

Re: [DISCUSS] Bot for stale PRs on GitHub

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/

[DISCUSS] Bot for stale PRs on GitHub

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/ ) to our Github Repo? This would automatically nag about stale PRs and close them