I think the process of getting many PRs into green in terms of CI pass while no meaningful review done is causing a lot of noise. My mailbox is swamped and this actually causes me to miss human comments across PRs that I track. At least for me, it takes longer to track the PRs that I can help review and merge due to that noise. The "ready for maintainer review" is not useful for me.
My recommendation would be to tune down running the tools. Maybe focus on 20 PRs to the finish line and only then move to the next batch. Getting 200 PRs into "ready" is proven not useful I think. On Wed, Jun 10, 2026 at 7:17 PM Jarek Potiuk <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi everyone, > > Building on Ash's recent discussion, I’d love to start a conversation about > how we handle our open PRs. While we explore PR templates and instructions, > I believe looking at our current data can help us find the best path > forward together. > > I’ve been looking into the statistics from our last four weeks of triage > (you can see the details here: > https://gistpreview.github.io/?ff06225744d9386195510453190e354a), and I > wanted to share some encouraging insights: > > - Out of 373 open PRs from non-maintainers, we’ve successfully identified > 95 as Drafts. Most of these (70%) were moved to draft status during triage > to help authors focus on fixes, which keeps our main queue much leaner. > - We have 211 PRs "ready for maintainer review," meaning they pass all > our CI and testing criteria. > - Interestingly, about 108 of these are fully ready but haven't received > a comment yet, and 23 are approved and just waiting for a final merge. > > The great news is that about 80% of our current triage actions are > deterministic! We could potentially automate these into CI scripts, which > would naturally clear about 100 items from our review queue. I’m more than > happy to help set this up if you think it’s a good next step. > > I really value the human element in our community and want to make sure our > contributors feel heard. > > Since many follow our criteria perfectly but still wait weeks for a > response, I’d love to hear your creative ideas on how we can better support > them and stay on top of these high-quality PRs. > > What do you all think? > > Best regards, > > Jarek >
