Clean up old PRs
Julian H. Stacey
jhs at berklix.com
Mon May 16 13:57:52 UTC 2011
Matthew Seaman wrote:
> On 16/05/2011 13:02, Jerry wrote:
> > x - expired
> > This report is over 2 years old. If no one has bothered to fix it
> > by now, then in all probability no one will.
> I've had PRs committed after spending many years in the queue. Just
> because it's old doesn't mean it's pointless.
Me too. (I don't chase commits once send-pr submitted, as I keep my own
patch tree, so I just delete my patches when/if they're commited. )
If FreeBSD auto expired old patches just 'cos no one had been interested
to test & commit yet, it would discourage submission of send-pr's.
> Closing older PRs that have been rendered irrelevant by the passage of
> time, or where the problem can not be reproduced on a current system, or
> where the original submitter has disappeared and there's no one else
> interested: that seems like a worthwhile project to me. But there
> should be better selection criteria than just the time elapsed since
Might it be more useful be to somewhat redefine categories
category f - feedback &
category s - suspended
So FreeBSD could more precisely point volunteers at work needing any human,
as opposed to patches suspended needing a specific human or a commiter.
Perhaps we might more explicitly label, eg:
- Waiting for any volunteer to independently 2nd test & verify.
- Waiting for originator to respond
- Waiting for commit to some combo of rel. head. src/ ports/ doc/
- Waiting for machine resources eg hard or software etc.
Julian Stacey, BSD Unix Linux C Sys Eng Consultants Munich http://berklix.com
Mail plain text; Not quoted-printable, Not HTML, Not base 64.
Reply below text sections not at top, to avoid breaking cumulative context.
More information about the freebsd-ports