Allow triagers to close PRs if the PR is of very low quality #828
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
As discussed on the CPython core-dev discord channel, there are several issues of the current policy that states that triagers should never close PRS: - Github's setup allows members of the triage team to close PRs, regardless of the policy stated in the devguide. - This policy isn't consistently followed by all members of the triage team. Some triagers occasionally close PRs (I have closed one or two myself in situations where it seemed abundantly clear that there was no prospect of the PR being merged). - This policy isn't really enforced in any way if triagers do close PRs. This lack of enforcement seems to be an implicit endorsement of the idea that it is okay for triagers to close PRs in some circumstances. - It feels silly to have to bother a core dev with a request for a PR to be closed if it's self-evident that it should be closed (e.g. if the PR makes changes to a deprecated module, makes solely cosmetic changes to a module, or simply has a 0% chance of ever being merged) - Changing this policy will help towards the goal of reducing the CPython PR backlog
iritkatriel
reviewed
Apr 9, 2022
hugovk
reviewed
Apr 10, 2022
Co-authored-by: Hugo van Kemenade <[email protected]>
JelleZijlstra
approved these changes
Apr 10, 2022
|
Thanks all! |
AA-Turner
pushed a commit
to AA-Turner/devguide
that referenced
this pull request
Jun 17, 2022
) As discussed on the CPython core-dev discord channel, there are several issues of the current policy that states that triagers should never close PRS: - Github's setup allows members of the triage team to close PRs, regardless of the policy stated in the devguide. - This policy isn't consistently followed by all members of the triage team. Some triagers occasionally close PRs (I have closed one or two myself in situations where it seemed abundantly clear that there was no prospect of the PR being merged). - This policy isn't really enforced in any way if triagers do close PRs. This lack of enforcement seems to be an implicit endorsement of the idea that it is okay for triagers to close PRs in some circumstances. - It feels silly to have to bother a core dev with a request for a PR to be closed if it's self-evident that it should be closed (e.g. if the PR makes changes to a deprecated module, makes solely cosmetic changes to a module, or simply has a 0% chance of ever being merged) - Changing this policy will help towards the goal of reducing the CPython PR backlog Co-authored-by: Hugo van Kemenade <[email protected]>
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
As discussed on the CPython core-dev discord channel, there are several issues with the current policy that states that triagers should never close PRs: