Just an FYI to everyone, we’ve merged in an Action to close stale PRs: https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/26877
2019년 12월 8일 (일) 오전 9:49, Hyukjin Kwon <gurwls...@gmail.com>님이 작성: > It doesn't need to exactly follow the conditions I used before as long as > Github Actions can provide other good options or conditions. > I just wanted to make sure the condition is reasonable. > > 2019년 12월 7일 (토) 오전 11:23, Hyukjin Kwon <gurwls...@gmail.com>님이 작성: > >> lol how did you know I'm going to read this email Sean? >> >> When I manually identified the stale PRs, I used this conditions below: >> >> 1. Author's inactivity over a year. If the PRs were simply waiting for a >> review, I excluded it from stale PR list. >> 2. Ping one time and see if there are any updates within 3 days. >> 3. If it meets both conditions above, they were considered as stale PRs. >> >> Yeah, I agree with it. But I think the conditions of stale PRs matter. >> What kind of conditions and actions the Github Actions support, and which >> of them do you plan to add? >> >> I didn't like to close and automate the stale PRs but I think it's time >> to consider. But I think the conditions have to be pretty reasonable >> so that we give a proper reason to the author and/or don't happen to >> close some good and worthy PRs. >> >> >> 2019년 12월 7일 (토) 오전 3:23, Sean Owen <sro...@gmail.com>님이 작성: >> >>> We used to not be able to close PRs directly, but now we can, so I >>> assume this is as fine a way of doing so, if we want to. I don't think >>> there's a policy against it or anything. >>> Hyukjin how have you managed this one in the past? >>> I don't mind it being automated if the idle time is long and it posts >>> some friendly message about reopening if there is a material change in the >>> proposed PR, the problem, or interest in merging it. >>> >>> On Fri, Dec 6, 2019 at 11:20 AM Nicholas Chammas < >>> nicholas.cham...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>>> That's true, we do use Actions today. I wonder if Apache Infra allows >>>> Actions to close PRs vs. just updating commit statuses. I only ask because >>>> I remember permissions were an issue in the past when discussing tooling >>>> like this. >>>> >>>> In any case, I'd be happy to submit a PR adding this in if there are no >>>> concerns. We can hash out the details on the PR. >>>> >>>> On Fri, Dec 6, 2019 at 11:08 AM Sean Owen <sro...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>> I think we can add Actions, right? they're used for the newer tests in >>>>> Github? >>>>> I'm OK closing PRs inactive for a 'long time', where that's maybe 6-12 >>>>> months or something. It's standard practice and doesn't mean it can't be >>>>> reopened. >>>>> Often the related JIRA should be closed as well but we have done that >>>>> separately with bulk-close in the past. >>>>> >>>>> On Thu, Dec 5, 2019 at 3:24 PM Nicholas Chammas < >>>>> nicholas.cham...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> It’s that topic again. 😄 >>>>>> >>>>>> We have almost 500 open PRs. A good chunk of them are more than a >>>>>> year old. The oldest open PR dates to summer 2015. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> https://github.com/apache/spark/pulls?q=is%3Apr+is%3Aopen+sort%3Acreated-asc >>>>>> >>>>>> GitHub has an Action for closing stale PRs. >>>>>> >>>>>> https://github.com/marketplace/actions/close-stale-issues >>>>>> >>>>>> What do folks think about deploying it? Does Apache Infra give us the >>>>>> ability to even deploy a tool like this? >>>>>> >>>>>> Nick >>>>>> >>>>>
