As of now, the open PRs and Calcite JIRAs are close enough to matching (96 vs 98). (There are a few for Avatica in the JIRA query). Thanks all those that helped clean up.
Kevin Risden On Thu, Feb 28, 2019 at 4:21 PM Kevin Risden <kris...@apache.org> wrote: > One thing that I think would help is to add a Github PR template [1]. We > did this for Apache Knox to help make sure that PRs follow some simple > guidelines. After the gitbox migration, PRs are automatically linked to > JIRA (which is good). I think we just had some PRs prior to gitbox > migration that didn't have the autolink part. > > [1] > https://help.github.com/en/articles/creating-a-pull-request-template-for-your-repository > [2] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KNOX-1760 > > Kevin Risden > > > On Thu, Feb 28, 2019 at 4:07 PM Vladimir Sitnikov < > sitnikov.vladi...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Francis> Our problem is mainly due to PRs not being reviewed. >> >> Once upon a time I did try to pass over the PRs, and I added some randoms >> here and there. >> I'm not sure what others think of that, however we have: >> >> 17 "returned-with-feedback": >> >> https://github.com/apache/calcite/pulls?q=is%3Apr+is%3Aopen+label%3Areturned-with-feedback >> 6 with pending discussion in JIRA: >> >> https://github.com/apache/calcite/pulls?utf8=%E2%9C%93&q=is%3Apr+is%3Aopen+label%3Adiscussion-in-jira >> >> I like "LGTM-will-merge-soon" as a soft warning to other committers that >> "hey, either you chime in or I just commit this stuff". >> We have 2 by the way: >> https://github.com/apache/calcite/labels/LGTM-will-merge-soon >> >> Vladimir >> >
