On Thu, Oct 11, 2018 at 11:44 AM Sage Weil <sweil@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Thu, 11 Oct 2018, Gregory Farnum wrote: > > I don't love the idea of auto-closing because a lot of those dead PRs > > are (or at least *were*) on the shoulders of reviewers and core team > > members, not the submitter. Maybe we could start using a > > "pending-submitter" tag or something that would be auto-closed? > > Yeah... I'm thinking this is as much a forcing fuction for the maintainers > as it is for the contributors. We can also start out with thresholds that > add the 'stale' flag and comment but don't close issues (yet) until we > have some time to do a scrub and catch up. > > > Of course I also have not seen a PR scrub in...years? So maybe it's > > just that that needs to become a more regular part of the workflow I > > and others do. :/ Is your expectation that every bug scrub includes a > > review of PRs tagged with that component, and a check of untagged PRs? > > Yeah, I think making PR scrubs a part of the regular process is a key > piece of this! Well, Patrick and I started with this in our overall Ceph project (ex-bug-only) scrub today. We used the following query and went through the last month's worth of PRs that it matched, plus started cleaning up some of the old ones: https://github.com/ceph/ceph/pulls?q=is%3Apr+is%3Aopen+-label%3Acore+-label%3Acephfs+-label%3Amgr+-label%3Arbd+-label%3Argw+-label%3Aceph-volume+-label%3Abluestore+-label%3Adashboard+-label%3Acrimson+-label%3Apybind+-label%3Aperformance+-label%3Acommon+milestone%3Anone+sort%3Acreated-desc There actually weren't too many it hit within the last month, although I'm sure the project-specific scrubs are going to be more time-intensive and I'm not entirely sure how often eg the pybind label will get looked at, so there may still be some issues there. -Greg
