Hi All, Flagging issues as state (but not closing them automatically) is useful, IMHO.
Those labels can be used in search criteria for backlog grooming. Also, the stale notification can help to promote review. Cheers, Dmitri. On Fri, Feb 6, 2026 at 12:42 PM Yufei Gu <[email protected]> wrote: > I think we don't even need to flag issues as stale, but I'm fine to do > that. Approved the PR. Thanks a lot for acting on it, Alex! > > Yufei > > > On Fri, Feb 6, 2026 at 6:10 AM Alexandre Dutra <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Hi all, > > > > Alright, here is a PR: https://github.com/apache/polaris/pull/3683 > > > > It still marks issues stale but doesn't close them. It also fixes some > > misconfigurations. > > > > If that's not what you folks want, let's continue this discussion in the > > PR. > > > > Thanks, > > Alex > > > > On Fri, Feb 6, 2026 at 12:04 PM Jean-Baptiste Onofré <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > > > > Hi > > > > > > My take on this one is that we have consensus to close PRs but not > > issues. > > > > > > I would suggest to start like this and revisit later if needed. > > > > > > Regards > > > JB > > > > > > Le ven. 6 févr. 2026 à 11:58, Alexandre Dutra <[email protected]> a > > écrit : > > > > > > > Hi all, > > > > > > > > What are the next steps here? It seems we have more people in favor > of > > > > NOT closing than closing. Is my understanding correct? > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > Alex > > > > > > > > On Thu, Feb 5, 2026 at 12:37 AM Yufei Gu <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Thanks Alex for raising this. +1 to not closing the issue > > automatically. > > > > > > > > > > Yufei > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Feb 4, 2026 at 4:44 AM Francois Papon <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Alexandre, > > > > > > > > > > > > Sounds good to me, we can try this approach and see if it fit in > > the > > > > > > future. > > > > > > > > > > > > regards, > > > > > > > > > > > > François > > > > > > > > > > > > Le 04/02/2026 à 11:44, Alexandre Dutra a écrit : > > > > > > > Hi all, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I'm open to either approach, but I wanted to explain why having > > this > > > > > > > job running might not be such a big deal: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Since many community contributors subscribe to all Polaris > > > > > > > notifications, any stale issue notification from the CI job > will > > be > > > > > > > received by many people. This provides us with an opportunity > to > > > > > > > evaluate whether an issue should be reopened or not. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > In fact, we just saw this in action: the job flagged this issue > > [1] > > > > as > > > > > > > stale 8 hours ago, and Robert immediately unflagged it :-) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > While frequently unflagging issues could become a burden, for > the > > > > time > > > > > > > being, the effort required seems minimal. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Just my 2 cents. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > > Alex > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [1]: > > > > > > > > https://github.com/apache/polaris/issues/3086#issuecomment-3844852237 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Feb 4, 2026 at 9:42 AM Francois Papon > > > > > > > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > >> Hi, > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> I am agree with JB, closing PR automatically after 14 days can > > be a > > > > > > >> little agressive and whitout review, the users will not > > understand > > > > why. > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> Closing a PR without answer activity after a delay from the > user > > > > make > > > > > > >> more sense to me. > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> regards, > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> François > > > > > > >> [email protected] > > > > > > >> [email protected] > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> Le 04/02/2026 à 09:33, Jean-Baptiste Onofré a écrit : > > > > > > >>> Hi Alex, > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> Thanks for starting this discussion! > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> While I am comfortable with automatically closing PRs (as the > > > > author > > > > > > can > > > > > > >>> always comment to keep them open), I don't believe we should > > > > > > automatically > > > > > > >>> close issues. Issues are typically opened for a good reason > and > > > > should > > > > > > be > > > > > > >>> reviewed, reproduced, and investigated. I prefer having > > reviewers > > > > > > manually > > > > > > >>> close issues when appropriate. > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> Regards, > > > > > > >>> JB > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> On Tue, Feb 3, 2026 at 10:52 PM Alexandre Dutra < > > [email protected] > > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>>> Hi team, > > > > > > >>>> > > > > > > >>>> A recent PR [1] fixed a misconfiguration that had prevented > > the > > > > > > >>>> automatic closing of stale issues from working in Polaris. > > While > > > > this > > > > > > >>>> feature seems to have been intended from the start, its > > > > re-enablement > > > > > > >>>> raises a fundamental question: should we be closing stale > > issues > > > > > > >>>> automatically? > > > > > > >>>> > > > > > > >>>> Arguments for closing include: > > > > > > >>>> > > > > > > >>>> - It helps to clear out issues that are no longer being > > actively > > > > > > >>>> worked on or are irrelevant. > > > > > > >>>> > > > > > > >>>> - The system provides a 14-day grace period before an issue > is > > > > closed, > > > > > > >>>> giving anyone the chance to comment and keep the issue open. > > > > > > >>>> > > > > > > >>>> Arguments against closing include: > > > > > > >>>> > > > > > > >>>> - An issue might still be valid even if the original > reporter > > has > > > > > > >>>> become inactive. Closing it could lead to losing track of > > > > important, > > > > > > >>>> unresolved problems. > > > > > > >>>> > > > > > > >>>> What are your thoughts on this? > > > > > > >>>> > > > > > > >>>> Thanks, > > > > > > >>>> Alex > > > > > > >>>> > > > > > > >>>> [1]: https://github.com/apache/polaris/pull/3636 > > > > > > >>>> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
