Skip to content

Changes for stale GHA v9 #27523

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Dec 15, 2023
Merged

Changes for stale GHA v9 #27523

merged 1 commit into from
Dec 15, 2023

Conversation

rcomer
Copy link
Member

@rcomer rcomer commented Dec 15, 2023

PR summary

Since nobody objected to my comment at #27495 (comment), I went ahead and implemented that.

For the existing workflow

  • reduced operations-per-run to 20. If I've done this right, that means we get a maximum of five issues/PRs labelled as inactive for each run, and so max 15 per week.
  • bumped the action version to 9, so supercedes and closes Bump actions/stale from 8 to 9 #27495.

Because the existing workflow won't get around to checking the issues it already labelled for a long time, add a new workflow to tidy up after the first one. The difference between the two workflows is:

< name: 'Label inactive PRs'
---
> name: 'Close inactive issues'
4c4
<     - cron: '30 1 * * 1,3,5'
---
>     - cron: '30 1 * * 2,4,6'
14,15c14,15
<           operations-per-run: 20
<           stale-pr-message: 'Since this Pull Request has not been updated in 60 days, it has been marked "inactive." This does not mean that it will be closed, though it may be moved to a "Draft" state.  This helps maintainers prioritize their reviewing efforts. You can pick the PR back up anytime - please ping us if you need a review or guidance to move the PR forward!  If you do not plan on continuing the work, please let us know so that we can either find someone to take the PR over, or close it.'
---
>           operations-per-run: 300
>           days-before-stale: -1
17d16
<           days-before-pr-stale: 60
19d17
<           stale-issue-message: 'This issue has been marked "inactive" because it has been 365 days since the last comment. If this issue is still present in recent Matplotlib releases, or the feature request is still wanted, please leave a comment and this label will be removed. If there are no updates in another 30 days, this issue will be automatically closed, but you are free to re-open or create a new issue if needed. We value issue reports, and this procedure is meant to help us resurface and prioritize issues that have not been addressed yet, not make them disappear.  Thanks for your help!'
22d19
<           days-before-issue-stale: 365
  • Setting days-before-stale to a negative number means the new workflow does not add the label to any issues or PRs and therefore does not need the messages.
  • I deliberately set the operations-per-run high (though the specific choice of 300 is a bit arbitrary) so the workflow will check through all the currently labelled item fairly quickly. It should only generate notifications when it finds an issue that has had the label for a month, so shouldn't be too noisy regardless of how high we set this number.

I do not really like the copy/paste nature of this change, but can't currently see a better way. Hopefully we will eventually clear the backlog of old issues, at which point we can just bump up the operations-per-run in the original workflow and remove the extra one.

The upside of all this is that I think we should see more steady progress through the issue backlog.

PR checklist

@ksunden ksunden merged commit fed37f6 into matplotlib:main Dec 15, 2023
@rcomer rcomer deleted the stale9 branch December 15, 2023 18:23
@QuLogic QuLogic added this to the v3.9.0 milestone Dec 15, 2023
@QuLogic QuLogic added Maintenance CI: testing CI configuration and testing labels Dec 15, 2023
@rcomer rcomer mentioned this pull request Dec 20, 2023
5 tasks
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
CI: testing CI configuration and testing Maintenance
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants