Stale PR stats @May01

2020-05-01 Thread Mark J Cox
Last month I started a script to ping stale PRs that were in certain states. The script has also been collecting statistics (trending and snapshot). I intend to post this monthly and after a few months with trends and commentary. PRs that have not had any updates in the last 30 days and are not

Re: Stale PR stats @May01

2020-05-01 Thread Matt Caswell
This is really nice! Thanks Mark. Matt On 01/05/2020 08:52, Mark J Cox wrote: > Last month I started a script to ping stale PRs that were in certain > states. The script has also been collecting statistics (trending and > snapshot). I intend to post this monthly and after a few months with > tr

Re: Stale PR stats @May01

2020-05-01 Thread Salz, Rich
This is great transparency info. Failed CI's are a problem since it's often the fault of timeouts, or sometimes master is broken. Any thoughts on how to handle that? >So, ignoring deferred issues too you could summarise this as: Stale PRs waiting for us to do something: 27 (last mo

Re: Stale PR stats @May01

2020-05-01 Thread Dmitry Belyavsky
Dear Mark, Many thanks for your efforts! And I also got an idea that ping comment leaves PRs out of this statistics :) On Fri, May 1, 2020 at 10:53 AM Mark J Cox wrote: > Last month I started a script to ping stale PRs that were in certain > states. The script has also been collecting statist

Re: Stale PR stats @May01

2020-05-01 Thread Mark J Cox
On Fri, May 1, 2020 at 3:30 PM Dmitry Belyavsky wrote: .. > And I also got an idea that ping comment leaves PRs out of this statistics :) Thanks! The script is designed to ignore the automated pings that it creates itself so they themselves don't reset the dates and artificially stop things bein

Re: Stale PR stats @May01

2020-05-01 Thread Dmitry Belyavsky
On Fri, May 1, 2020 at 6:19 PM Mark J Cox wrote: > On Fri, May 1, 2020 at 3:30 PM Dmitry Belyavsky wrote: > .. > > And I also got an idea that ping comment leaves PRs out of this > statistics :) > > Thanks! The script is designed to ignore the automated pings that it > creates itself so they th

Re: OpenSSL version 3.0.0-alpha1 published

2020-05-01 Thread Guido Vranken
Reminder that in git master and 3.0.0, CAST5 gives the wrong output: https://github.com/openssl/openssl/issues/11459 (this proof of concept was made before you moved CAST5 to liblegacy, so just put OSSL_PROVIDER_load(nullptr, "legacy"); in there to make it work) On Thu, Apr 23, 2020 at 4:30 PM Ope

Re: OpenSSL version 3.0.0-alpha1 published

2020-05-01 Thread SHANE LONTIS
Thanks.. I will take a look. Shane > On 2 May 2020, at 2:20 am, Guido Vranken wrote: > > Reminder that in git master and 3.0.0, CAST5 gives the wrong output: > https://github.com/openssl/openssl/issues/11459 >