drill-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Timothy Farkas <tfar...@mapr.com>
Subject Re: [Discuss] Cleanup Old PRs
Date Wed, 06 Jun 2018 21:52:30 GMT
I agree we should close PRs after about 3 months. We can have a middle ground as well. Github
allows us to tag PRs. Probot stale allows us to exempt PRs with a matching tag from our time
limit. So we can all agree on a tag to use such as "pending", then the committers can go through
the PRs and tag anything that they want to grandfather in and make exempt from closing. The
rest of the PRs will be closed automatically.

Since this impacts the entire community and not many people have participated in this discussion,
I will put together a poll and post it on a new [Vote] thread within the next couple of days.
I'll leave the Poll open for a couple of weeks and then we can take action based on the results
of the poll.

Thanks,
Tim

________________________________
From: Pritesh Maker <pmaker@mapr.com>
Sent: Monday, June 4, 2018 3:27:38 PM
To: dev@drill.apache.org
Subject: Re: [Discuss] Cleanup Old PRs

+1

We should apply it retroactively as well - for any PRs that have not been touched in the last
2-3 months should be closed.

´╗┐On 6/4/18, 12:48 PM, "Abhishek Girish" <agirish@apache.org> wrote:

    +1 on the concept of auto-closing stale PRs (based on what we'd define it
    to be). But, not sure if we'd want to apply it retroactively.

    On Mon, Jun 4, 2018 at 11:56 AM Timothy Farkas <tfarkas@mapr.com> wrote:

    > Hi all again!
    >
    > With the latest batch commit we are down from 148 open PRs to 107. To
    > prune things down further, I'd like to propose using probot stale
    > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__github.com_probot_stale&d=DwIBaQ&c=cskdkSMqhcnjZxdQVpwTXg&r=zySISmkmM4WNViCKijENtQ&m=TpWuCVbYmGnU09jGSqSNFcB1CcbAYJM5aRH-tw0a1vc&s=fHhVTQBk7IoDXIwyxEQTwiMvUsenpJIJeFpeh_HKLDE&e=.
This is a handy github app which
    > automatically marks old PRs as stale and closes them. This way we can
    > automatically and politely close PRs that have been inactive for an
    > extended period of time.
    >
    > What are everyone's thoughts on this?
    >
    > Thanks,
    > Tim
    >
    > ________________________________
    > From: Timothy Farkas <tfarkas@mapr.com>
    > Sent: Friday, June 1, 2018 11:01:13 AM
    > To: dev@drill.apache.org
    > Subject: Re: [Discuss] Cleanup Old PRs
    >
    > Hi All,
    >
    > These are some PRs that were already +1'd by a committer but never merged.
    > Most have conflicts, some don't even have conflicts. If there are any
    > volunteers to take these across the finish line that would be great.
    >
    >
    >
    > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__github.com_apache_drill_pull_292&d=DwIFAg&c=cskdkSMqhcnjZxdQVpwTXg&r=4eQVr8zB8ZBff-yxTimdOQ&m=8lEIkAws5ws0hRlTD16Tg9OXn-3okcDiiTTK0c8syBk&s=6T2Y_mslcnhGM6t5fYAkT1Mt3w2AjwHs2ySTUTjJr54&e=
    >
    >
    > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__github.com_apache_drill_pull_309&d=DwIFAg&c=cskdkSMqhcnjZxdQVpwTXg&r=4eQVr8zB8ZBff-yxTimdOQ&m=8lEIkAws5ws0hRlTD16Tg9OXn-3okcDiiTTK0c8syBk&s=y87vZ1v67LLrJguhoz3mZRazrJr8KPIKSatjFk1Upns&e=
    >
    >
    > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__github.com_apache_drill_pull_437&d=DwIFAg&c=cskdkSMqhcnjZxdQVpwTXg&r=4eQVr8zB8ZBff-yxTimdOQ&m=8lEIkAws5ws0hRlTD16Tg9OXn-3okcDiiTTK0c8syBk&s=k0WD3r2gH9nEAYoRZkBkRJAPaZ4qI0M0pqTJ2SR2mJY&e=
    >
    >
    > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__github.com_apache_drill_pull_441&d=DwIFAg&c=cskdkSMqhcnjZxdQVpwTXg&r=4eQVr8zB8ZBff-yxTimdOQ&m=8lEIkAws5ws0hRlTD16Tg9OXn-3okcDiiTTK0c8syBk&s=LugFzfwxsEbNHdcxXHAalcxUSRrTYwx6qLzcfwh3rd0&e=
    >
    >
    > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__github.com_apache_drill_pull_455&d=DwIFAg&c=cskdkSMqhcnjZxdQVpwTXg&r=4eQVr8zB8ZBff-yxTimdOQ&m=8lEIkAws5ws0hRlTD16Tg9OXn-3okcDiiTTK0c8syBk&s=jL4kOKrjipWBK2hCYvx9Ndhw7l81izk1hfnepyV1_J4&e=
    >
    >
    > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__github.com_apache_drill_pull_480&d=DwIFAg&c=cskdkSMqhcnjZxdQVpwTXg&r=4eQVr8zB8ZBff-yxTimdOQ&m=8lEIkAws5ws0hRlTD16Tg9OXn-3okcDiiTTK0c8syBk&s=5Mt1bCi5z_yyXRZGABHX2p4d8Ejba5X9n7HHxVYzFuo&e=
    >
    >
    > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__github.com_apache_drill_pull_652&d=DwIFAg&c=cskdkSMqhcnjZxdQVpwTXg&r=4eQVr8zB8ZBff-yxTimdOQ&m=8lEIkAws5ws0hRlTD16Tg9OXn-3okcDiiTTK0c8syBk&s=kNOi7uwV_1Thu1z0pCEIsy_WbApul65jeYKbBN7yslk&e=
    >
    >
    >
    > There were also 7 really small documentation changes that I think we can
    > merge and close. I will follow up with Bridget about those.
    >
    > Thanks,
    > Tim
    >
    > ________________________________
    > From: Timothy Farkas <tfarkas@mapr.com>
    > Sent: Thursday, May 31, 2018 6:05:15 PM
    > To: dev@drill.apache.org
    > Subject: Re: [Discuss] Cleanup Old PRs
    >
    > Closed the first round of obsolete PRs. Went from 148 open to 125 open.
    >
    >
    > I observed some other low hanging fruit that could be closed. Specifically
    > there were some small PRs against gh-pages, half of which were already +1'd
    > but never merged and the other half of which looked pretty reasonable to me
    > but never reviewed. So my question is what is the proper process for
    > merging changes into gh-pages?
    >
    >
    > Paul to kickstart the process of pushing PRs over the line I'll compile a
    > list of PRs that were +1'd but never merged. Perhaps we can get some
    > committers to volunteer to update the old +1'd PRs and merge them.
    >
    > Thanks,
    > Tim
    >
    >
    > ________________________________
    > From: Paul Rogers <par0328@yahoo.com.INVALID>
    > Sent: Thursday, May 31, 2018 4:53:24 PM
    > To: dev@drill.apache.org
    > Subject: Re: [Discuss] Cleanup Old PRs
    >
    > +1
    >
    > I just learned to ignore the ancient PRs; they were not adding much value.
    >
    > If a PR looks like it could be resurrected, we might consider 1) assigning
    > a committer to help push it over the line, and 2) check back with submitter
    > to see if they can update it.
    >
    > We tried the above a few times over the last couple of years and were able
    > to finish a couple of otherwise-stale PRs.
    >
    > Thanks,
    > - Paul
    >
    >
    >
    >     On Thursday, May 31, 2018, 2:35:25 PM PDT, Timothy Farkas <
    > tfarkas@mapr.com> wrote:
    >
    >  Hi All,
    >
    > There are a lot of open PRs. I think it would be good to close some of
    > them in order to identify the remaining PRs that require action to be
    > taken. Specifically I was thinking of first closing obsolete PRs and then
    > see how far that takes us. A PR could be considered obsolete if it is:
    >
    >
    >   *  Changing code or documentation that no longer exists.
    >   *  Adding documentation that is no longer correct.
    >   *  Has a note already on the PR that it needs to be closed because
    > another PR was opened.
    >
    >
    > Any thoughts?
    >
    > Thanks,
    > Tim
    >


Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message