Closed apiraino closed 11 months ago
@rustbot claim
I feel like the costs of doing this (extra code, opportunity for bugs when a PR is closed + opened in quick succession...) are significantly higher than adding is:open to the search query, if that's the only motivation.
main motivation is trying to keep the issue tracker a bit tidy[^1]. But if you think there are too many unknown unknowns I will just close this :slightly_smiling_face:
For reference, we have now:
(these numbers don't tell the whole story, of course)
[^1]: incidentally making my bookkeeping work of following PRs waiting for a review a bit easier
I'd be happy to do a cron task that does this after 7 days of PR being closed or something if you want? But I don't think I understand the cost to your scripts yet.
thanks for the suggestion, I'll think about it.
When PRs are closed (therefore not merged), the review labels (
S-waiting-on-author
orS-waiting-on-review
) are not removed. Since they are not useful anymore they can be removed. Take into account both ways that a PR can be closed:@rustbot close
(I think they are two separate code paths in the triagebot labels/comments handling logic)This small cleanup can help f.e. when looking for all PRs waiting on a review: the
is:open
filter would not be needed anymore.I'm probably forgetting other labels that can be removed as well.