Hi Arnav - Thanks for bringing this up. I was considering the same and agree.
I don't think we need such a long period of inactivity or a warning though. Let's just close them with a respectful message that they can reopen if they plan to move it forward. Thoughts? --larry On Sun, Feb 15, 2026, 7:26 AM Arnav Balyan <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi team, > > I noticed that we have several open PRs from a few years ago that have not > seen activity in a long time. It can make it harder to tell which PRs are > currently active and ready for review, and may add maintenance overhead. > > Would it make sense to introduce a stale PR policy? For example, marking a > PR as inactive after 6 months of no activity, with 1 warning at 5 months to > inform the author that it would be auto closed if there is no response. > > Contributors could always reopen their PR if they plan to continue the > work. This could make the project more clear and friendly for newcomers and > reduce maintenance overhead for maintainers. > > Would love to know what you think. > > Regards, > Arnav >
