Clean up old PRs

[Julian H. Stacey]

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
> submission.

Agreed.

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.

Cheers,
Julian
-- 
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.