It seems like we probably have lazy consensus to add the stale PRs functionality, would a committer mind reviewing/merging https://github.com/apache/iceberg-rust/pull/1665?
Thanks, Micah On Wed, Sep 10, 2025 at 2:33 AM Renjie Liu <[email protected]> wrote: > > I think other languages deferred on stale PRs but we can maybe see how > the stale issues go and to the same for stale PRs it if works well? > > Sounds reasonable to me. > > > On Wed, Sep 10, 2025 at 2:18 PM Manu Zhang <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> +1. I think stale PR actions could remind authors and reviewers of PRs >> they might have forgotten. >> >> On Wed, Sep 10, 2025 at 1:09 PM Micah Kornfield <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>> >Should we also consider adding a github action to close stale prs? >>> >>> I think other languages deferred on stale PRs but we can maybe see how >>> the stale issues go and to the same for stale PRs it if works well? >>> >>> On Mon, Sep 8, 2025 at 11:01 PM Renjie Liu <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> +1 for adding this. Should we also consider adding a github action to >>>> close stale prs? >>>> >>>> On Tue, Sep 9, 2025 at 12:44 PM Kevin Liu <[email protected]> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> +1 I think it's a good idea to add this. It's been helpful for >>>>> pyiceberg to clean up stale issues. The author can reopen as needed. >>>>> >>>>> Best, >>>>> Kevin Liu >>>>> >>>>> On Mon, Sep 8, 2025 at 9:17 PM Micah Kornfield <[email protected]> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Hi Iceberg Rust Devs, >>>>>> I opened https://github.com/apache/iceberg-rust/pull/1665 to copy >>>>>> the configuration from iceberg-python to mark issues as stale and >>>>>> eventually close them. >>>>>> >>>>>> This was already discussed for Java [1] and as noted it also happens >>>>>> for python. I just wanted to make sure there aren't any objections to >>>>>> turning it on for rust. >>>>>> >>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>> Micah >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> [1] https://lists.apache.org/thread/hlkwn0f2lgn2od5f3zxdtzsh4lxcp04w >>>>>> >>>>>
