curl / Mailing Lists / curl-library / Single Mail


Re: Closing idle issues and pull-requests

From: Michael Felt <>
Date: Fri, 21 Apr 2017 15:37:08 +0200

As far as 90/14 days - what is your bigger concern? That something gets
lost (removed) prematurely, or that it hangs around "too" long, before
someone gets back to it.

If this is only for "stale" pull-requests - may be fine, as the original
author (pull-requestor) should still have their files. However, I know
myself - I have days when I can look at git-related projects and/or
respond/write to a mailing lists and then months where work prevents me
from continued involvement.

Lastly - assuming the bot sends mail to "all" who have commented on a
pull-request, 14 days may be a bit short. Just my luck - I go on
vacation for 21 days and the bot sends mail I do not see for 19 days...
imho: 14 days is cutting it tight.

On 4/7/2017 11:54 AM, Daniel Stenberg wrote:
> Hi,
> We regularly close bug reports and provided pull requests that don't
> go anywhere and are for all practical purposes abandoned[1]. This has
> been done pure manually. Bugs or work that get focus back can always
> be reopened or a new issue can be filed. It helps us filter out the
> "dead ones".
> To streamline this policy and to remove the human factor from the
> equation a bit, I want to switch on a bot that will do this
> automatically[2] and I'm now looking for input and thoughts.
> The idea is that the bot marks all "stale" issues that haven't had any
> activity for 90 days. If no further activity is noted in the 14 days
> following that, the issue gets closed.
> The 90 and 14 numbers are configurable variables that I consider
> suitable but we can always tweak them. Now or in the future.
> [1] =
> [2] =

Received on 2017-04-21