Re: MR Gardening - A discussion, please leave your input!
I believe this discussion can now be closed. I have just added Gcompris and KDiff3 to the Exclusions list on the https://community.kde.org/Gardening page KDE Gardening will now properly start labeling stale MRs as 'Gardening: Stale' and posting a reminder message when the MR reaches 30 days of zero activity. KDE Gardening will NOT close any MRs, although the option of closing the MR is offered in the message. "[...] If this merge request isn’t needed anymore, or if you aren’t willing to work on it, you may close it. Note that KDE Gardening will **NOT** close this MR, only the projects maintainers or the author of an MR can close it. [...]" If you would like to add your project to the list of exclusions, please send an email to garden...@kde.org. Thanks for your feedback, - Kye Potter, KDE Gardening. On 11/03/2023 5:01 pm, Thomas Baumgart wrote: On Freitag, 10. März 2023 20:55:00 CET Ben Cooksley wrote: On Sat, Mar 11, 2023 at 3:19 AM David Hurka wrote: On Thursday, March 9, 2023 9:40:47 AM CET Méven wrote: We could use a "stale" label for MR to allow maintainers to see the script's results. And even a "closing-soon" label, for MR not-update in the last 12 months. Is there a rule that all open merge requests need care? I would expect that it is enough to label an open merge request as “stale”. Merge requests are usually closed because they are bad. Stale merge requests are probably good, otherwise they would have been closed intentionally. I recall in the last few months someone mentioning a MR in #kde-devel that had been approved and just never merged, and had been sitting like that for months. All it took to get merged was a reminder by way of comment on the MR to get it merged as the original author of the change was no longer around. So yes, there is definitely value in reminders and caring for those MRs. I guess the difference here is between higher activity projects - whose MRs are likely to be more well looked after - and those with lower activity. Projects with lower activity tend to involve developers who look after many different projects, and will therefore benefit from reminders. Those with higher activity are much less likely to see value from it. Closing of MRs though is something that should only be done after review by the developers who run the project. Maybe in a semi-automated way such that the developer can mark the MR in a specific way and which closes it after a grace period when there is no more activity. OpenPGP_signature Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: MR Gardening - A discussion, please leave your input!
I believe this discussion can now be closed. I have just added Gcompris and KDiff3 to the Exclusions list on the https://community.kde.org/Gardening page KDE Gardening will now properly start labeling stale MRs as 'Gardening: Stale' and posting a reminder message when the MR reaches 30 days of zero activity. KDE Gardening will NOT close any MRs, although the option of closing the MR is offered in the message. "[...] If this merge request isn’t needed anymore, or if you aren’t willing to work on it, you may close it. Note that KDE Gardening will **NOT** close this MR, only the projects maintainers or the author of an MR can close it. [...]" If you would like to add your project to the list of exclusions, please send an email to garden...@kde.org. Thanks for your feedback, - Kye Potter, KDE Gardening. On 11/03/2023 5:01 pm, Thomas Baumgart wrote: On Freitag, 10. März 2023 20:55:00 CET Ben Cooksley wrote: On Sat, Mar 11, 2023 at 3:19 AM David Hurka wrote: On Thursday, March 9, 2023 9:40:47 AM CET Méven wrote: We could use a "stale" label for MR to allow maintainers to see the script's results. And even a "closing-soon" label, for MR not-update in the last 12 months. Is there a rule that all open merge requests need care? I would expect that it is enough to label an open merge request as “stale”. Merge requests are usually closed because they are bad. Stale merge requests are probably good, otherwise they would have been closed intentionally. I recall in the last few months someone mentioning a MR in #kde-devel that had been approved and just never merged, and had been sitting like that for months. All it took to get merged was a reminder by way of comment on the MR to get it merged as the original author of the change was no longer around. So yes, there is definitely value in reminders and caring for those MRs. I guess the difference here is between higher activity projects - whose MRs are likely to be more well looked after - and those with lower activity. Projects with lower activity tend to involve developers who look after many different projects, and will therefore benefit from reminders. Those with higher activity are much less likely to see value from it. Closing of MRs though is something that should only be done after review by the developers who run the project. Maybe in a semi-automated way such that the developer can mark the MR in a specific way and which closes it after a grace period when there is no more activity. OpenPGP_signature Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: MR Gardening - A discussion, please leave your input!
On Freitag, 10. März 2023 20:55:00 CET Ben Cooksley wrote: > On Sat, Mar 11, 2023 at 3:19 AM David Hurka wrote: > > > On Thursday, March 9, 2023 9:40:47 AM CET Méven wrote: > > > We could use a "stale" label for MR to allow maintainers to see the > > > script's results. > > > And even a "closing-soon" label, for MR not-update in the last 12 months. > > > > Is there a rule that all open merge requests need care? > > I would expect that it is enough to label an open merge request as “stale”. > > > > Merge requests are usually closed because they are bad. > > Stale merge requests are probably good, otherwise they would have been > > closed > > intentionally. > > > > I recall in the last few months someone mentioning a MR in #kde-devel that > had been approved and just never merged, and had been sitting like that for > months. > All it took to get merged was a reminder by way of comment on the MR to get > it merged as the original author of the change was no longer around. > > So yes, there is definitely value in reminders and caring for those MRs. > > I guess the difference here is between higher activity projects - whose MRs > are likely to be more well looked after - and those with lower activity. > Projects with lower activity tend to involve developers who look after many > different projects, and will therefore benefit from reminders. Those with > higher activity are much less likely to see value from it. > > Closing of MRs though is something that should only be done after review by > the developers who run the project. Maybe in a semi-automated way such that the developer can mark the MR in a specific way and which closes it after a grace period when there is no more activity. -- Regards Thomas Baumgart - A champion is defined not by their wins but by how they can recover when they fall. (Serena Williams) - signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: MR Gardening - A discussion, please leave your input!
On Sat, Mar 11, 2023 at 3:19 AM David Hurka wrote: > On Thursday, March 9, 2023 9:40:47 AM CET Méven wrote: > > We could use a "stale" label for MR to allow maintainers to see the > > script's results. > > And even a "closing-soon" label, for MR not-update in the last 12 months. > > Is there a rule that all open merge requests need care? > I would expect that it is enough to label an open merge request as “stale”. > > Merge requests are usually closed because they are bad. > Stale merge requests are probably good, otherwise they would have been > closed > intentionally. > I recall in the last few months someone mentioning a MR in #kde-devel that had been approved and just never merged, and had been sitting like that for months. All it took to get merged was a reminder by way of comment on the MR to get it merged as the original author of the change was no longer around. So yes, there is definitely value in reminders and caring for those MRs. I guess the difference here is between higher activity projects - whose MRs are likely to be more well looked after - and those with lower activity. Projects with lower activity tend to involve developers who look after many different projects, and will therefore benefit from reminders. Those with higher activity are much less likely to see value from it. Closing of MRs though is something that should only be done after review by the developers who run the project. > > David > > > Regards, Ben
Re: MR Gardening - A discussion, please leave your input!
Le mar. 7 mars 2023 à 00:15, AnnoyingRains a écrit : > > We should never close a MR automatically. Only a maintainer of a project > or the author itself should close a MR. > > I agree with not closing MRs automatically. As I stated in my original > message, we are no longer planning on doing that, it's not helpful and > is only destructive. > The decision to close an MR will be left with the specific project's > maintainers and the person who opened the MR. > > I would argue we should allow some degree of automated closing. Maintainers' time is precious, requiring maintainers to follow up every opened MRs in addition to the bugs and their own dev work is excessive. Contributors should be warned and have a say, but when they don't react, what to do then ? That's something that happens for dolphin or Kio, cases I know. Plus the longer the stale guests the more bit-rot the code gets. Every MRs gets either merged given enough time, or abandoned by its author(s). We can't expect every contributor to finish their MR and especially months or years later. Some will, some won't. I guess projects could have different needs, but it seems to me a large auto-close threshold of 18 or 24 months or so would hardly do any harm. We could use a "stale" label for MR to allow maintainers to see the script's results. And even a "closing-soon" label, for MR not-update in the last 12 months. > > The decision if a MR should be closed or not is often depending on a > context (e.g. a MR required another MR to be merged first > > and it is taking more time than expected, the author is busy with other > things but will eventually come back to it, ...) > > and a script is unable to see this. > > I would also argue that humans that are not a maintainer of that > specific project should not close an MR for similar reasons. There is > a lot here that the gardening team would need to know about every > project > > > for GCompris, we don't have a lot of MR and even if some are old, we > still plan to take over them at some point (we know which ones are > unmaintained) so I think it's preferable to not add messages. > > We can exclude Gcompris if you feel it is needed, but I am unsure how > labeling MRs as stale and reminding authors wouldn't be preferable. > > > but this should probably be done manually > > We are planning on doing this manually until all of the issues have > been ironed out perfectly and we know a foolproof way to ensure > nothing is ever poked that shouldn't be, which may never happen. > We will open another discussion before automating anything, due to the > potential disaster a bug could cause. > > > "Hi, I really like this work, do you intent to continue working > > on it or can I take over" than a generic message that feels fake. > > This is great, but not exactly what this inititive is about. > This is more for reminding people that the MR exists (even had one > case of "oh! I forgot I made this MR" in my small scale test!), and > labeling MRs so that contributors feel more free to request taking > over the project. > Basically, we cannot really take over every stale MR in the entirety of > KDE. > > - Kye Potter, KDE Gardening > > > On Tue, Mar 7, 2023 at 9:39 AM Albert Astals Cid wrote: > > > > El dilluns, 6 de març de 2023, a les 15:18:42 (CET), Carl Schwan va > escriure: > > > Hi, > > > > > > We should never close a MR automatically. Only a maintainer of a > project > > > or the author itself should close a MR. The decision if a MR should be > > > closed or not is often depending on a context (e.g. a MR required > another > > > MR to be merged first and it is taking more time than expected, the > > > author is busy with other things but will eventually come back to it, > ...) > > > and a script is unable to see this. > > > > > > I do not mind poking people semi-regularly (every 6 months or so), but > again > > > this should probably be done manually and with a small personalized > message > > > for example: "Hi, I really like this work, do you intent to continue > > > working on it or can I take over" than a generic message that feels > fake. > > > > > > I really hate communicating with robots instead of with humans and I > really > > > see the trends of trying to automatize all our interaction with dumb > robots > > > and chat bots in our society really worrying. > > > > > > If we want to automatize, we should instead try to list the stale MRs > and > > > maybe send the list to the mailing list once a month so that people are > > > reminded about them and take a look at which one they may be able to > unlock. > > > > We already have that, they get posted to > > https://invent.kde.org/teams/gardening/gitlab/-/issues > > weekly. > This listing is great, could we add a label "stale" to the MR concerned so that's explicit for maintainers. -- Méven
Re: MR Gardening - A discussion, please leave your input!
On Thursday, March 9, 2023 9:40:47 AM CET Méven wrote: > We could use a "stale" label for MR to allow maintainers to see the > script's results. > And even a "closing-soon" label, for MR not-update in the last 12 months. Is there a rule that all open merge requests need care? I would expect that it is enough to label an open merge request as “stale”. Merge requests are usually closed because they are bad. Stale merge requests are probably good, otherwise they would have been closed intentionally. David
Re: MR Gardening - A discussion, please leave your input!
On donderdag 9 maart 2023 09:40:47 CET Méven wrote: > Maintainers' time is precious, requiring maintainers to follow up every > opened MRs in addition to the bugs and their own dev work is excessive. That is true, and it's why I have asked for Krita to be excluded from gardening. Every gardening action creates work, because I will need to check it and possibly do something about it. I don't have time for that. Halla
Re: MR Gardening - A discussion, please leave your input!
Le mar. 7 mars 2023 à 00:15, AnnoyingRains a écrit : > > We should never close a MR automatically. Only a maintainer of a project > or the author itself should close a MR. > > I agree with not closing MRs automatically. As I stated in my original > message, we are no longer planning on doing that, it's not helpful and > is only destructive. > The decision to close an MR will be left with the specific project's > maintainers and the person who opened the MR. > > I would argue we should allow some degree of automated closing. Maintainers' time is precious, requiring maintainers to follow up every opened MRs in addition to the bugs and their own dev work is excessive. Contributors should be warned and have a say, but when they don't react, what to do then ? That's something that happens for dolphin or Kio, cases I know. Plus the longer the stale guests the more bit-rot the code gets. Every MRs gets either merged given enough time, or abandoned by its author(s). We can't expect every contributor to finish their MR and especially months or years later. Some will, some won't. I guess projects could have different needs, but it seems to me a large auto-close threshold of 18 or 24 months or so would hardly do any harm. We could use a "stale" label for MR to allow maintainers to see the script's results. And even a "closing-soon" label, for MR not-update in the last 12 months. > > The decision if a MR should be closed or not is often depending on a > context (e.g. a MR required another MR to be merged first > > and it is taking more time than expected, the author is busy with other > things but will eventually come back to it, ...) > > and a script is unable to see this. > > I would also argue that humans that are not a maintainer of that > specific project should not close an MR for similar reasons. There is > a lot here that the gardening team would need to know about every > project > > > for GCompris, we don't have a lot of MR and even if some are old, we > still plan to take over them at some point (we know which ones are > unmaintained) so I think it's preferable to not add messages. > > We can exclude Gcompris if you feel it is needed, but I am unsure how > labeling MRs as stale and reminding authors wouldn't be preferable. > > > but this should probably be done manually > > We are planning on doing this manually until all of the issues have > been ironed out perfectly and we know a foolproof way to ensure > nothing is ever poked that shouldn't be, which may never happen. > We will open another discussion before automating anything, due to the > potential disaster a bug could cause. > > > "Hi, I really like this work, do you intent to continue working > > on it or can I take over" than a generic message that feels fake. > > This is great, but not exactly what this inititive is about. > This is more for reminding people that the MR exists (even had one > case of "oh! I forgot I made this MR" in my small scale test!), and > labeling MRs so that contributors feel more free to request taking > over the project. > Basically, we cannot really take over every stale MR in the entirety of > KDE. > > - Kye Potter, KDE Gardening > > > On Tue, Mar 7, 2023 at 9:39 AM Albert Astals Cid wrote: > > > > El dilluns, 6 de març de 2023, a les 15:18:42 (CET), Carl Schwan va > escriure: > > > Hi, > > > > > > We should never close a MR automatically. Only a maintainer of a > project > > > or the author itself should close a MR. The decision if a MR should be > > > closed or not is often depending on a context (e.g. a MR required > another > > > MR to be merged first and it is taking more time than expected, the > > > author is busy with other things but will eventually come back to it, > ...) > > > and a script is unable to see this. > > > > > > I do not mind poking people semi-regularly (every 6 months or so), but > again > > > this should probably be done manually and with a small personalized > message > > > for example: "Hi, I really like this work, do you intent to continue > > > working on it or can I take over" than a generic message that feels > fake. > > > > > > I really hate communicating with robots instead of with humans and I > really > > > see the trends of trying to automatize all our interaction with dumb > robots > > > and chat bots in our society really worrying. > > > > > > If we want to automatize, we should instead try to list the stale MRs > and > > > maybe send the list to the mailing list once a month so that people are > > > reminded about them and take a look at which one they may be able to > unlock. > > > > We already have that, they get posted to > > https://invent.kde.org/teams/gardening/gitlab/-/issues > > weekly. > This listing is great, could we add a label "stale" to the MR concerned so that's explicit for maintainers. -- Méven
Re: MR Gardening - A discussion, please leave your input!
> We should never close a MR automatically. Only a maintainer of a project or > the author itself should close a MR. I agree with not closing MRs automatically. As I stated in my original message, we are no longer planning on doing that, it's not helpful and is only destructive. The decision to close an MR will be left with the specific project's maintainers and the person who opened the MR. > The decision if a MR should be closed or not is often depending on a context > (e.g. a MR required another MR to be merged first > and it is taking more time than expected, the author is busy with other > things but will eventually come back to it, ...) > and a script is unable to see this. I would also argue that humans that are not a maintainer of that specific project should not close an MR for similar reasons. There is a lot here that the gardening team would need to know about every project > for GCompris, we don't have a lot of MR and even if some are old, we still > plan to take over them at some point (we know which ones are unmaintained) so > I think it's preferable to not add messages. We can exclude Gcompris if you feel it is needed, but I am unsure how labeling MRs as stale and reminding authors wouldn't be preferable. > but this should probably be done manually We are planning on doing this manually until all of the issues have been ironed out perfectly and we know a foolproof way to ensure nothing is ever poked that shouldn't be, which may never happen. We will open another discussion before automating anything, due to the potential disaster a bug could cause. > "Hi, I really like this work, do you intent to continue working > on it or can I take over" than a generic message that feels fake. This is great, but not exactly what this inititive is about. This is more for reminding people that the MR exists (even had one case of "oh! I forgot I made this MR" in my small scale test!), and labeling MRs so that contributors feel more free to request taking over the project. Basically, we cannot really take over every stale MR in the entirety of KDE. - Kye Potter, KDE Gardening On Tue, Mar 7, 2023 at 9:39 AM Albert Astals Cid wrote: > > El dilluns, 6 de març de 2023, a les 15:18:42 (CET), Carl Schwan va escriure: > > Hi, > > > > We should never close a MR automatically. Only a maintainer of a project > > or the author itself should close a MR. The decision if a MR should be > > closed or not is often depending on a context (e.g. a MR required another > > MR to be merged first and it is taking more time than expected, the > > author is busy with other things but will eventually come back to it, ...) > > and a script is unable to see this. > > > > I do not mind poking people semi-regularly (every 6 months or so), but again > > this should probably be done manually and with a small personalized message > > for example: "Hi, I really like this work, do you intent to continue > > working on it or can I take over" than a generic message that feels fake. > > > > I really hate communicating with robots instead of with humans and I really > > see the trends of trying to automatize all our interaction with dumb robots > > and chat bots in our society really worrying. > > > > If we want to automatize, we should instead try to list the stale MRs and > > maybe send the list to the mailing list once a month so that people are > > reminded about them and take a look at which one they may be able to unlock. > > We already have that, they get posted to > https://invent.kde.org/teams/gardening/gitlab/-/issues > weekly. > > What i forgot is what i did to be notified of it by email ^_^ > > Cheers, > Albert > > > > > Cheers, > > Carl > > > > > > --- Original Message --- > > > > Le dimanche 5 mars 2023 à 11:13 AM, AnnoyingRains > a écrit : > > > For a short amount of time now, there have been some small-scale > > > trials of replying to old MRs with a reminder, and suggesting that the > > > author closes the MR if it is either no longer needed or if it needs > > > more work and the author does not have time for it. > > > > > > This has appeared to have a positive impact on the state of KDE > > > software from this (albeit limited) trial. Some MRs have had renewed > > > interest, others have admitted that they had forgotten that the MR > > > even existed. > > > > > > We did consider closing MRs if there was no activity after our ping > > > message. We are no longer planning on doing this, as it is more > > > destructive than helpful. All decisions on if a MR should be closed > > > will be left with the maintainers and the person who opened the MR. > > > > > > So, we need a proper discussion about this, should we send these > > > reminder messages at all? If so, how old should an MR be before > > > sending this reminder? Should closing the MR even be suggested in the > > > message? > > > > > > If your specific project does not play nicely with this programme, > > > please let us know and we can add it to
MR Gardening - A discussion, please leave your input!
For a short amount of time now, there have been some small-scale trials of replying to old MRs with a reminder, and suggesting that the author closes the MR if it is either no longer needed or if it needs more work and the author does not have time for it. This has appeared to have a positive impact on the state of KDE software from this (albeit limited) trial. Some MRs have had renewed interest, others have admitted that they had forgotten that the MR even existed. We did consider closing MRs if there was no activity after our ping message. **We are no longer planning on doing this**, as it is more destructive than helpful. All decisions on if a MR should be closed will be left with the maintainers and the person who opened the MR. So, we need a proper discussion about this, should we send these reminder messages at all? If so, how old should an MR be before sending this reminder? Should closing the MR even be suggested in the message? If your specific project does not play nicely with this programme, please let us know and we can add it to the list of exclusions on our KDE Community page. I need your input, - Kye Potter, KDE Gardening
Re: MR Gardening - A discussion, please leave your input!
KDiff3 is in a similar position to GCompris and would not at this benefit from auto closing or extra messaging on MR's Mar 6, 2023 3:29:12 PM Johnny Jazeix : > Hi, > > for GCompris, we don't have a lot of MR and even if some are old, we still > plan to take over them at some point (we know which ones are unmaintained) so > I think it's preferable to not add messages. > > In a general manner, as said by Carl, MR should not be closed automatically. > > Cheers, > > Johnny > > Le dim. 5 mars 2023 à 11:14, AnnoyingRains a écrit : >> For a short amount of time now, there have been some small-scale >> trials of replying to old MRs with a reminder, and suggesting that the >> author closes the MR if it is either no longer needed or if it needs >> more work and the author does not have time for it. >> >> This has appeared to have a positive impact on the state of KDE >> software from this (albeit limited) trial. Some MRs have had renewed >> interest, others have admitted that they had forgotten that the MR >> even existed. >> >> We did consider closing MRs if there was no activity after our ping >> message. **We are no longer planning on doing this**, as it is more >> destructive than helpful. All decisions on if a MR should be closed >> will be left with the maintainers and the person who opened the MR. >> >> So, we need a proper discussion about this, should we send these >> reminder messages at all? If so, how old should an MR be before >> sending this reminder? Should closing the MR even be suggested in the >> message? >> >> If your specific project does not play nicely with this programme, >> please let us know and we can add it to the list of exclusions on our >> KDE Community page. >> >> I need your input, >> - Kye Potter, KDE Gardening signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: MR Gardening - A discussion, please leave your input!
Le mar. 7 mars 2023 à 00:15, AnnoyingRains a écrit : > > We should never close a MR automatically. Only a maintainer of a project > or the author itself should close a MR. > > I agree with not closing MRs automatically. As I stated in my original > message, we are no longer planning on doing that, it's not helpful and > is only destructive. > The decision to close an MR will be left with the specific project's > maintainers and the person who opened the MR. > > > The decision if a MR should be closed or not is often depending on a > context (e.g. a MR required another MR to be merged first > > and it is taking more time than expected, the author is busy with other > things but will eventually come back to it, ...) > > and a script is unable to see this. > > I would also argue that humans that are not a maintainer of that > specific project should not close an MR for similar reasons. There is > a lot here that the gardening team would need to know about every > project > > > for GCompris, we don't have a lot of MR and even if some are old, we > still plan to take over them at some point (we know which ones are > unmaintained) so I think it's preferable to not add messages. > > We can exclude Gcompris if you feel it is needed, but I am unsure how > labeling MRs as stale and reminding authors wouldn't be preferable. > > Hi, It will be considered as noise and ignored. We have two use cases: * Either the person is following and if a MR is stalling it's because maintainers don't have enough time to handle it now. * Either the person is no more following (for multiple reasons) and maintainers already know it and they plan to handle the MR later. In both cases, no action will be taken. As there are not a lot of MR (6), it's an amount we can handle it by ourselves. I think what you propose is more important and has more values when there a lot of MR opened and it's more complicated to handle them (or more maintainers).² Cheers, Johnny > > but this should probably be done manually > > We are planning on doing this manually until all of the issues have > been ironed out perfectly and we know a foolproof way to ensure > nothing is ever poked that shouldn't be, which may never happen. > We will open another discussion before automating anything, due to the > potential disaster a bug could cause. > > > "Hi, I really like this work, do you intent to continue working > > on it or can I take over" than a generic message that feels fake. > > This is great, but not exactly what this inititive is about. > This is more for reminding people that the MR exists (even had one > case of "oh! I forgot I made this MR" in my small scale test!), and > labeling MRs so that contributors feel more free to request taking > over the project. > Basically, we cannot really take over every stale MR in the entirety of > KDE. > > - Kye Potter, KDE Gardening > > > On Tue, Mar 7, 2023 at 9:39 AM Albert Astals Cid wrote: > > > > El dilluns, 6 de març de 2023, a les 15:18:42 (CET), Carl Schwan va > escriure: > > > Hi, > > > > > > We should never close a MR automatically. Only a maintainer of a > project > > > or the author itself should close a MR. The decision if a MR should be > > > closed or not is often depending on a context (e.g. a MR required > another > > > MR to be merged first and it is taking more time than expected, the > > > author is busy with other things but will eventually come back to it, > ...) > > > and a script is unable to see this. > > > > > > I do not mind poking people semi-regularly (every 6 months or so), but > again > > > this should probably be done manually and with a small personalized > message > > > for example: "Hi, I really like this work, do you intent to continue > > > working on it or can I take over" than a generic message that feels > fake. > > > > > > I really hate communicating with robots instead of with humans and I > really > > > see the trends of trying to automatize all our interaction with dumb > robots > > > and chat bots in our society really worrying. > > > > > > If we want to automatize, we should instead try to list the stale MRs > and > > > maybe send the list to the mailing list once a month so that people are > > > reminded about them and take a look at which one they may be able to > unlock. > > > > We already have that, they get posted to > > https://invent.kde.org/teams/gardening/gitlab/-/issues > > weekly. > > > > What i forgot is what i did to be notified of it by email ^_^ > > > > Cheers, > > Albert > > > > > > > > Cheers, > > > Carl > > > > > > > > > --- Original Message --- > > > > > > Le dimanche 5 mars 2023 à 11:13 AM, AnnoyingRains < > annoyingra...@gmail.com> > > a écrit : > > > > For a short amount of time now, there have been some small-scale > > > > trials of replying to old MRs with a reminder, and suggesting that > the > > > > author closes the MR if it is either no longer needed or if it needs > > > > more work and the author does not have time for it. >
Re: MR Gardening - A discussion, please leave your input!
Le mar. 7 mars 2023 à 00:15, AnnoyingRains a écrit : > > We should never close a MR automatically. Only a maintainer of a project > or the author itself should close a MR. > > I agree with not closing MRs automatically. As I stated in my original > message, we are no longer planning on doing that, it's not helpful and > is only destructive. > The decision to close an MR will be left with the specific project's > maintainers and the person who opened the MR. > > > The decision if a MR should be closed or not is often depending on a > context (e.g. a MR required another MR to be merged first > > and it is taking more time than expected, the author is busy with other > things but will eventually come back to it, ...) > > and a script is unable to see this. > > I would also argue that humans that are not a maintainer of that > specific project should not close an MR for similar reasons. There is > a lot here that the gardening team would need to know about every > project > > > for GCompris, we don't have a lot of MR and even if some are old, we > still plan to take over them at some point (we know which ones are > unmaintained) so I think it's preferable to not add messages. > > We can exclude Gcompris if you feel it is needed, but I am unsure how > labeling MRs as stale and reminding authors wouldn't be preferable. > > Hi, It will be considered as noise and ignored. We have two use cases: * Either the person is following and if a MR is stalling it's because maintainers don't have enough time to handle it now. * Either the person is no more following (for multiple reasons) and maintainers already know it and they plan to handle the MR later. In both cases, no action will be taken. As there are not a lot of MR (6), it's an amount we can handle it by ourselves. I think what you propose is more important and has more values when there a lot of MR opened and it's more complicated to handle them (or more maintainers).² Cheers, Johnny > > but this should probably be done manually > > We are planning on doing this manually until all of the issues have > been ironed out perfectly and we know a foolproof way to ensure > nothing is ever poked that shouldn't be, which may never happen. > We will open another discussion before automating anything, due to the > potential disaster a bug could cause. > > > "Hi, I really like this work, do you intent to continue working > > on it or can I take over" than a generic message that feels fake. > > This is great, but not exactly what this inititive is about. > This is more for reminding people that the MR exists (even had one > case of "oh! I forgot I made this MR" in my small scale test!), and > labeling MRs so that contributors feel more free to request taking > over the project. > Basically, we cannot really take over every stale MR in the entirety of > KDE. > > - Kye Potter, KDE Gardening > > > On Tue, Mar 7, 2023 at 9:39 AM Albert Astals Cid wrote: > > > > El dilluns, 6 de març de 2023, a les 15:18:42 (CET), Carl Schwan va > escriure: > > > Hi, > > > > > > We should never close a MR automatically. Only a maintainer of a > project > > > or the author itself should close a MR. The decision if a MR should be > > > closed or not is often depending on a context (e.g. a MR required > another > > > MR to be merged first and it is taking more time than expected, the > > > author is busy with other things but will eventually come back to it, > ...) > > > and a script is unable to see this. > > > > > > I do not mind poking people semi-regularly (every 6 months or so), but > again > > > this should probably be done manually and with a small personalized > message > > > for example: "Hi, I really like this work, do you intent to continue > > > working on it or can I take over" than a generic message that feels > fake. > > > > > > I really hate communicating with robots instead of with humans and I > really > > > see the trends of trying to automatize all our interaction with dumb > robots > > > and chat bots in our society really worrying. > > > > > > If we want to automatize, we should instead try to list the stale MRs > and > > > maybe send the list to the mailing list once a month so that people are > > > reminded about them and take a look at which one they may be able to > unlock. > > > > We already have that, they get posted to > > https://invent.kde.org/teams/gardening/gitlab/-/issues > > weekly. > > > > What i forgot is what i did to be notified of it by email ^_^ > > > > Cheers, > > Albert > > > > > > > > Cheers, > > > Carl > > > > > > > > > --- Original Message --- > > > > > > Le dimanche 5 mars 2023 à 11:13 AM, AnnoyingRains < > annoyingra...@gmail.com> > > a écrit : > > > > For a short amount of time now, there have been some small-scale > > > > trials of replying to old MRs with a reminder, and suggesting that > the > > > > author closes the MR if it is either no longer needed or if it needs > > > > more work and the author does not have time for it. >
Re: MR Gardening - A discussion, please leave your input!
KDiff3 is in a similar position to GCompris and would not at this benefit from auto closing or extra messaging on MR's Mar 6, 2023 3:29:12 PM Johnny Jazeix : > Hi, > > for GCompris, we don't have a lot of MR and even if some are old, we still > plan to take over them at some point (we know which ones are unmaintained) so > I think it's preferable to not add messages. > > In a general manner, as said by Carl, MR should not be closed automatically. > > Cheers, > > Johnny > > Le dim. 5 mars 2023 à 11:14, AnnoyingRains a écrit : >> For a short amount of time now, there have been some small-scale >> trials of replying to old MRs with a reminder, and suggesting that the >> author closes the MR if it is either no longer needed or if it needs >> more work and the author does not have time for it. >> >> This has appeared to have a positive impact on the state of KDE >> software from this (albeit limited) trial. Some MRs have had renewed >> interest, others have admitted that they had forgotten that the MR >> even existed. >> >> We did consider closing MRs if there was no activity after our ping >> message. **We are no longer planning on doing this**, as it is more >> destructive than helpful. All decisions on if a MR should be closed >> will be left with the maintainers and the person who opened the MR. >> >> So, we need a proper discussion about this, should we send these >> reminder messages at all? If so, how old should an MR be before >> sending this reminder? Should closing the MR even be suggested in the >> message? >> >> If your specific project does not play nicely with this programme, >> please let us know and we can add it to the list of exclusions on our >> KDE Community page. >> >> I need your input, >> - Kye Potter, KDE Gardening signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: MR Gardening - A discussion, please leave your input!
> We should never close a MR automatically. Only a maintainer of a project or > the author itself should close a MR. I agree with not closing MRs automatically. As I stated in my original message, we are no longer planning on doing that, it's not helpful and is only destructive. The decision to close an MR will be left with the specific project's maintainers and the person who opened the MR. > The decision if a MR should be closed or not is often depending on a context > (e.g. a MR required another MR to be merged first > and it is taking more time than expected, the author is busy with other > things but will eventually come back to it, ...) > and a script is unable to see this. I would also argue that humans that are not a maintainer of that specific project should not close an MR for similar reasons. There is a lot here that the gardening team would need to know about every project > for GCompris, we don't have a lot of MR and even if some are old, we still > plan to take over them at some point (we know which ones are unmaintained) so > I think it's preferable to not add messages. We can exclude Gcompris if you feel it is needed, but I am unsure how labeling MRs as stale and reminding authors wouldn't be preferable. > but this should probably be done manually We are planning on doing this manually until all of the issues have been ironed out perfectly and we know a foolproof way to ensure nothing is ever poked that shouldn't be, which may never happen. We will open another discussion before automating anything, due to the potential disaster a bug could cause. > "Hi, I really like this work, do you intent to continue working > on it or can I take over" than a generic message that feels fake. This is great, but not exactly what this inititive is about. This is more for reminding people that the MR exists (even had one case of "oh! I forgot I made this MR" in my small scale test!), and labeling MRs so that contributors feel more free to request taking over the project. Basically, we cannot really take over every stale MR in the entirety of KDE. - Kye Potter, KDE Gardening On Tue, Mar 7, 2023 at 9:39 AM Albert Astals Cid wrote: > > El dilluns, 6 de març de 2023, a les 15:18:42 (CET), Carl Schwan va escriure: > > Hi, > > > > We should never close a MR automatically. Only a maintainer of a project > > or the author itself should close a MR. The decision if a MR should be > > closed or not is often depending on a context (e.g. a MR required another > > MR to be merged first and it is taking more time than expected, the > > author is busy with other things but will eventually come back to it, ...) > > and a script is unable to see this. > > > > I do not mind poking people semi-regularly (every 6 months or so), but again > > this should probably be done manually and with a small personalized message > > for example: "Hi, I really like this work, do you intent to continue > > working on it or can I take over" than a generic message that feels fake. > > > > I really hate communicating with robots instead of with humans and I really > > see the trends of trying to automatize all our interaction with dumb robots > > and chat bots in our society really worrying. > > > > If we want to automatize, we should instead try to list the stale MRs and > > maybe send the list to the mailing list once a month so that people are > > reminded about them and take a look at which one they may be able to unlock. > > We already have that, they get posted to > https://invent.kde.org/teams/gardening/gitlab/-/issues > weekly. > > What i forgot is what i did to be notified of it by email ^_^ > > Cheers, > Albert > > > > > Cheers, > > Carl > > > > > > --- Original Message --- > > > > Le dimanche 5 mars 2023 à 11:13 AM, AnnoyingRains > a écrit : > > > For a short amount of time now, there have been some small-scale > > > trials of replying to old MRs with a reminder, and suggesting that the > > > author closes the MR if it is either no longer needed or if it needs > > > more work and the author does not have time for it. > > > > > > This has appeared to have a positive impact on the state of KDE > > > software from this (albeit limited) trial. Some MRs have had renewed > > > interest, others have admitted that they had forgotten that the MR > > > even existed. > > > > > > We did consider closing MRs if there was no activity after our ping > > > message. We are no longer planning on doing this, as it is more > > > destructive than helpful. All decisions on if a MR should be closed > > > will be left with the maintainers and the person who opened the MR. > > > > > > So, we need a proper discussion about this, should we send these > > > reminder messages at all? If so, how old should an MR be before > > > sending this reminder? Should closing the MR even be suggested in the > > > message? > > > > > > If your specific project does not play nicely with this programme, > > > please let us know and we can add it to
Re: MR Gardening - A discussion, please leave your input!
El dilluns, 6 de març de 2023, a les 15:18:42 (CET), Carl Schwan va escriure: > Hi, > > We should never close a MR automatically. Only a maintainer of a project > or the author itself should close a MR. The decision if a MR should be > closed or not is often depending on a context (e.g. a MR required another > MR to be merged first and it is taking more time than expected, the > author is busy with other things but will eventually come back to it, ...) > and a script is unable to see this. > > I do not mind poking people semi-regularly (every 6 months or so), but again > this should probably be done manually and with a small personalized message > for example: "Hi, I really like this work, do you intent to continue > working on it or can I take over" than a generic message that feels fake. > > I really hate communicating with robots instead of with humans and I really > see the trends of trying to automatize all our interaction with dumb robots > and chat bots in our society really worrying. > > If we want to automatize, we should instead try to list the stale MRs and > maybe send the list to the mailing list once a month so that people are > reminded about them and take a look at which one they may be able to unlock. We already have that, they get posted to https://invent.kde.org/teams/gardening/gitlab/-/issues weekly. What i forgot is what i did to be notified of it by email ^_^ Cheers, Albert > > Cheers, > Carl > > > --- Original Message --- > > Le dimanche 5 mars 2023 à 11:13 AM, AnnoyingRains a écrit : > > For a short amount of time now, there have been some small-scale > > trials of replying to old MRs with a reminder, and suggesting that the > > author closes the MR if it is either no longer needed or if it needs > > more work and the author does not have time for it. > > > > This has appeared to have a positive impact on the state of KDE > > software from this (albeit limited) trial. Some MRs have had renewed > > interest, others have admitted that they had forgotten that the MR > > even existed. > > > > We did consider closing MRs if there was no activity after our ping > > message. We are no longer planning on doing this, as it is more > > destructive than helpful. All decisions on if a MR should be closed > > will be left with the maintainers and the person who opened the MR. > > > > So, we need a proper discussion about this, should we send these > > reminder messages at all? If so, how old should an MR be before > > sending this reminder? Should closing the MR even be suggested in the > > message? > > > > If your specific project does not play nicely with this programme, > > please let us know and we can add it to the list of exclusions on our > > KDE Community page. > > > > I need your input, > > - Kye Potter, KDE Gardening
Re: MR Gardening - A discussion, please leave your input!
Hi, for GCompris, we don't have a lot of MR and even if some are old, we still plan to take over them at some point (we know which ones are unmaintained) so I think it's preferable to not add messages. In a general manner, as said by Carl, MR should not be closed automatically. Cheers, Johnny Le dim. 5 mars 2023 à 11:14, AnnoyingRains a écrit : > For a short amount of time now, there have been some small-scale > trials of replying to old MRs with a reminder, and suggesting that the > author closes the MR if it is either no longer needed or if it needs > more work and the author does not have time for it. > > This has appeared to have a positive impact on the state of KDE > software from this (albeit limited) trial. Some MRs have had renewed > interest, others have admitted that they had forgotten that the MR > even existed. > > We did consider closing MRs if there was no activity after our ping > message. **We are no longer planning on doing this**, as it is more > destructive than helpful. All decisions on if a MR should be closed > will be left with the maintainers and the person who opened the MR. > > So, we need a proper discussion about this, should we send these > reminder messages at all? If so, how old should an MR be before > sending this reminder? Should closing the MR even be suggested in the > message? > > If your specific project does not play nicely with this programme, > please let us know and we can add it to the list of exclusions on our > KDE Community page. > > I need your input, > - Kye Potter, KDE Gardening >
Re: MR Gardening - A discussion, please leave your input!
Hi, for GCompris, we don't have a lot of MR and even if some are old, we still plan to take over them at some point (we know which ones are unmaintained) so I think it's preferable to not add messages. In a general manner, as said by Carl, MR should not be closed automatically. Cheers, Johnny Le dim. 5 mars 2023 à 11:14, AnnoyingRains a écrit : > For a short amount of time now, there have been some small-scale > trials of replying to old MRs with a reminder, and suggesting that the > author closes the MR if it is either no longer needed or if it needs > more work and the author does not have time for it. > > This has appeared to have a positive impact on the state of KDE > software from this (albeit limited) trial. Some MRs have had renewed > interest, others have admitted that they had forgotten that the MR > even existed. > > We did consider closing MRs if there was no activity after our ping > message. **We are no longer planning on doing this**, as it is more > destructive than helpful. All decisions on if a MR should be closed > will be left with the maintainers and the person who opened the MR. > > So, we need a proper discussion about this, should we send these > reminder messages at all? If so, how old should an MR be before > sending this reminder? Should closing the MR even be suggested in the > message? > > If your specific project does not play nicely with this programme, > please let us know and we can add it to the list of exclusions on our > KDE Community page. > > I need your input, > - Kye Potter, KDE Gardening >
Re: MR Gardening - A discussion, please leave your input!
Hi, We should never close a MR automatically. Only a maintainer of a project or the author itself should close a MR. The decision if a MR should be closed or not is often depending on a context (e.g. a MR required another MR to be merged first and it is taking more time than expected, the author is busy with other things but will eventually come back to it, ...) and a script is unable to see this. I do not mind poking people semi-regularly (every 6 months or so), but again this should probably be done manually and with a small personalized message for example: "Hi, I really like this work, do you intent to continue working on it or can I take over" than a generic message that feels fake. I really hate communicating with robots instead of with humans and I really see the trends of trying to automatize all our interaction with dumb robots and chat bots in our society really worrying. If we want to automatize, we should instead try to list the stale MRs and maybe send the list to the mailing list once a month so that people are reminded about them and take a look at which one they may be able to unlock. Cheers, Carl --- Original Message --- Le dimanche 5 mars 2023 à 11:13 AM, AnnoyingRains a écrit : > For a short amount of time now, there have been some small-scale > trials of replying to old MRs with a reminder, and suggesting that the > author closes the MR if it is either no longer needed or if it needs > more work and the author does not have time for it. > > This has appeared to have a positive impact on the state of KDE > software from this (albeit limited) trial. Some MRs have had renewed > interest, others have admitted that they had forgotten that the MR > even existed. > > We did consider closing MRs if there was no activity after our ping > message. We are no longer planning on doing this, as it is more > destructive than helpful. All decisions on if a MR should be closed > will be left with the maintainers and the person who opened the MR. > > So, we need a proper discussion about this, should we send these > reminder messages at all? If so, how old should an MR be before > sending this reminder? Should closing the MR even be suggested in the > message? > > If your specific project does not play nicely with this programme, > please let us know and we can add it to the list of exclusions on our > KDE Community page. > > I need your input, > - Kye Potter, KDE Gardening
MR Gardening - A discussion, please leave your input!
For a short amount of time now, there have been some small-scale trials of replying to old MRs with a reminder, and suggesting that the author closes the MR if it is either no longer needed or if it needs more work and the author does not have time for it. This has appeared to have a positive impact on the state of KDE software from this (albeit limited) trial. Some MRs have had renewed interest, others have admitted that they had forgotten that the MR even existed. We did consider closing MRs if there was no activity after our ping message. **We are no longer planning on doing this**, as it is more destructive than helpful. All decisions on if a MR should be closed will be left with the maintainers and the person who opened the MR. So, we need a proper discussion about this, should we send these reminder messages at all? If so, how old should an MR be before sending this reminder? Should closing the MR even be suggested in the message? If your specific project does not play nicely with this programme, please let us know and we can add it to the list of exclusions on our KDE Community page. I need your input, - Kye Potter, KDE Gardening
