Closing PR does not mean that the work submitted for a review is lost.
It is preserved on a contributor fork. All comments and discussion are
also preserved and PR can be re-open if/when a contributor have time to
look into it.
PR can be closed by any committer who was involved into the discussion
with a proper comment.
It is 1 month of inactivity on the PR. Note that PR review is also done
during spare time and recollecting what happened on an inactive PR after
3 month or a year requires extra time/effort from a committer and
everyone who were involved into the review.
Majority of projects that have hundreds outstanding PRs did not yet move
to gitbox and do not have write access to their github repos. For such
projects closing and opening closed PRs requires additional effort if
possible at all.
Thank you,
Vlad
On 9/23/17 08:12, Pramod Immaneni wrote:
I think one month time period is short since people typically contribute in
their spare time. I have seen PRs being worked on with breaks of more than
a month and I have gone back to PRs with that gap as well. Three months
would be ideal.
How would this be enforced? Would committers do this ad-hoc, whenever they
see some old PRs? Also, this may not be a problem right now and we may go
with more relaxed timelines (like 1 year) as there are other projects that
have hundreds of outstanding PRs. If the PR is open at least someone else
can take it from there, if the original contributor is no longer active on
it.
Thanks
On Fri, Sep 22, 2017 at 6:48 PM, Vlad Rozov <vro...@apache.org> wrote:
I'd suggest that a PR that lack an activity for more than a month is
closed. Any objections?
Thank you,
Vlad
