Jan, We can use something like the `stale` GH Bot/label based on a 30-day lack of inactivity and automatically close them. Just so you know – the authors and followers are always notified and can take the required measurements to move forward.
30 days is just something we already use at CNCF, we can change that based on our reality, of course. Cheers! -- Ricardo Zanini Fernandes Vida longa e próspera. On Thu, Oct 5, 2023 at 12:37 PM Jan Šťastný <[email protected]> wrote: > Hello all, > > together with the repositories, we've also transferred open Pull Requests, > some of them dating several months ago. > > I would like to bring up the topic to clean up the Pull Request queue which > would mean that only the relevant ones are kept. > > I understand this might be considered as neglecting contributions etc, if > not done correctly. Thus I'd like to discuss what should be the course of > action. > > I have one backing argument for keeping the PR up to date - CI. Both > Jenkins and GitHub Actions rely on files located in repositories > themselves. Even though build-chain is able to rebase changes on main, it > steps to action too late to accommodate for Jenkinsfile or GHA changes. > Especially in the case of Jenkinsfiles it might cause regressions when it > lacks a significant fix (especially in the initial phases these days when I > am manually rerunning PR checks from Jenkins - thus mistakenly invoking > those that are dormant). > > There are possible ways to work around this, I am aware. Though this is > supposed to be a more general discussion whether such PRs should be kept > open in the first place. > > Regards > Jan >
