I also don't know that I see the value of such a bot in parquet-mr -- the volume of PRs (especially low quality PRs, which can be an issue in other projects) is not that high. I would suggest a one-time cleaning of the parquet-mr queue and being a bit more aggressive going forward about closing stale PRs.
On Wed, Oct 23, 2019 at 9:50 AM Michael Heuer <[email protected]> wrote: > > I personally would rather we not use such a bot. > > If there are long running pull requests, ping the author and ask if the > changes are still relevant, and if so, ask the author to rebase. > > > > On Oct 23, 2019, at 9:12 AM, Xinli shang <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Agree with Junjie for the longer limit. We have several long running > > projects going on. Is there a white list with which we can bypass those > > projects? > > > > On Wed, Oct 23, 2019 at 7:01 AM Junjie Chen <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > >> Sounds good to have it. We might want to set the expiration limit to a > >> larger value according to commit history. > >> > >> Driesprong, Fokko <[email protected]> 于2019年10月23日周三 下午9:32写道： > >>> > >>> Hi all, > >>> > >>> I would suggest enabling Stalebot on the parquet-mr repo: > >>> > >> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__probot.github.io_apps_stale_&d=DwIFaQ&c=r2dcLCtU9q6n0vrtnDw9vg&r=FQ88AmOZ4TMjDdqNBGu-ag&m=waE-QM8dEvNWOZVGIHKxSp6iLXF-rbGKmTghRDqrPoA&s=KPKNffiF3Y_HEfU3OLbnmVPqNeTmKXkmNX-KkIGlgGI&e= > >>> > >>> Right now we have a lot of stale PR's there which have many conflicts and > >>> are not very likely to get merged anytime soon. The stalebot will mark > >> the > >>> Pull Request as stale after 60 days of inactivity, and close it after a > >>> week if there isn't any further activity. This will reduce the number of > >>> stale repositories. > >>> > >>> What do you think? > >>> > >>> Cheers, Fokko > >> > > -- > > Xinli Shang >
