From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail05.groups.io (mail05.groups.io [45.79.224.7]) by spool.mail.gandi.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1490B7803D9 for ; Tue, 5 Nov 2024 15:36:33 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: a=rsa-sha256; bh=BUtpi11mzVRRGHoKmfod83hbKkLsfxuyj+DGD0lsZMg=; c=relaxed/simple; d=groups.io; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version:In-Reply-To:Precedence:List-Subscribe:List-Help:Sender:List-Id:Mailing-List:Delivered-To:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Reply-To:List-Unsubscribe-Post:List-Unsubscribe:Content-Type:Content-Disposition; s=20240830; t=1730820993; v=1; x=1731080192; b=pxt219LOkNnWfTqnlGDH6oFEfPIYYk0YAUZGR780GOYuumE5yWcu5S1oPQI0+3jF1N3L+l4/ UKzbO2tFFvPv6a63cXsiYKL2A2+mqtqDMNLp5WeedkrXCJ6YIyrQz3vRcY5Nz+muAa1EF11k69w xh1fzfTJ2MuKKUioHGZdOrA8Uydg+peko84BLaUKll0L4UTb4FEr9RT3EVCN93wRJUZPPDo5kxD LSvvqBlxNMDXLCmqOlXTL8l0/3Z2QnsNludtP5THvAsFgEzOQL0ys4A0jrtSjT93gHjSOkYg4dQ 9us3S/m+u5/X+QUJjzzg42Qmjxc/fwBQE5J1/UZ//ltXQ== X-Received: by 127.0.0.2 with SMTP id oZRxYY7687511xU2KruFEcTw; Tue, 05 Nov 2024 07:36:32 -0800 X-Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.133.124]) by mx.groups.io with SMTP id smtpd.web10.22924.1730820986908508372 for ; Tue, 05 Nov 2024 07:36:27 -0800 X-Received: from mx-prod-mc-01.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com (ec2-54-186-198-63.us-west-2.compute.amazonaws.com [54.186.198.63]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.3, cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-286-Y-Xel3q2PcOfu2Q69stX6g-1; Tue, 05 Nov 2024 10:36:22 -0500 X-MC-Unique: Y-Xel3q2PcOfu2Q69stX6g-1 X-Received: from mx-prod-int-01.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com (mx-prod-int-01.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com [10.30.177.4]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by mx-prod-mc-01.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8C27F19560B2; Tue, 5 Nov 2024 15:36:21 +0000 (UTC) X-Received: from dobby.home.kraxel.org (unknown [10.39.195.58]) by mx-prod-int-01.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EABD93000198; Tue, 5 Nov 2024 15:36:20 +0000 (UTC) X-Received: by dobby.home.kraxel.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 6791322B482; Tue, 5 Nov 2024 16:36:18 +0100 (CET) Date: Tue, 5 Nov 2024 16:36:18 +0100 From: "Gerd Hoffmann" To: devel@edk2.groups.io, rebecca@bsdio.com Cc: "Kinney, Michael D" Subject: Re: [edk2-devel] Could we reconsider the GitHub stale PR bot please? Message-ID: References: <471e9604-b611-4051-80b8-6ef7f244d2d7@bsdio.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 3.4.1 on 10.30.177.4 X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Precedence: Bulk List-Subscribe: List-Help: Sender: devel@edk2.groups.io List-Id: Mailing-List: list devel@edk2.groups.io; contact devel+owner@edk2.groups.io Resent-Date: Tue, 05 Nov 2024 07:36:27 -0800 Resent-From: kraxel@redhat.com Reply-To: devel@edk2.groups.io,kraxel@redhat.com List-Unsubscribe-Post: List-Unsubscribe=One-Click List-Unsubscribe: X-Gm-Message-State: zjRRyCp0F0Z6wfVcSao0ACGpx7686176AA= Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline X-GND-Status: LEGIT Authentication-Results: spool.mail.gandi.net; dkim=pass header.d=groups.io header.s=20240830 header.b=pxt219LO; dmarc=fail reason="SPF not aligned (relaxed), DKIM not aligned (relaxed)" header.from=redhat.com (policy=none); spf=pass (spool.mail.gandi.net: domain of bounce@groups.io designates 45.79.224.7 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=bounce@groups.io On Tue, Nov 05, 2024 at 06:52:42AM -0700, Rebecca Cran wrote: > On 11/5/24 6:08 AM, Gerd Hoffmann wrote: > > On Mon, Oct 28, 2024 at 08:34:34PM -0600, Rebecca Cran wrote: > > > See the attached screenshot or > > > https://github.com/tianocore/edk2/pull/5907#issuecomment-2408745999 . > > > > > > The PR was marked stale by the bot and the PR author only responded two > > > weeks later - which would have been one week too late. > > > > > > Fortunately I noticed and commented to keep it open, but I think we should > > > reconsider the use of the stale bot. > > Why is that a problem? I still get email notifications in case someone > > adds a comment to a PR in closed (or merged) state, so updates do not go > > unnoticed. Also it is always possible to re-open closed PRs. > > When I had one of my PRs auto-closed a few months ago I wasn't able to > re-open it. But that might have been because it was during the freeze. > > I was told to create a new PR instead. Hmm. Re-opening not working is bad because we loose the old discussions when creating a new PR. But having lots of stale PRs in the list is not nice either. I don't like the idea to make the intervals *much* longer. Having only one week between stale warning and closing is very short, that is easily missed when going on vacation, extending that (say a month) looks sensible to me. The 60 days for "stale due to inactivity" looks fine to me. I'd leave that as-is, or maybe extend it a bit to match release cycle length (3 months). Is it possible to tag PRs as stale for other reasons? One obvious candidate would be if it can not be merged any more, i.e. when mergify asks for a rebase. take care, Gerd -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Groups.io Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#120732): https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/message/120732 Mute This Topic: https://groups.io/mt/109271104/7686176 Group Owner: devel+owner@edk2.groups.io Unsubscribe: https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/unsub [rebecca@openfw.io] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-