Should we have a bot which closes inactive issues more than 60 or 90 days?

[bhushan]

I see we have lot of issues but most of them are stale as there is no activity since years.

can we install a bot like https://github.com/apps/stale this,
so it will check issues which are inactive more than 60 or 90 days and closes them.

@greg0ire @derrabus @beberlei @ostrolucky @SenseException

[ostrolucky]

We use it in doctrine-bundle, but I'll never approve automatically closing issues that maintainer didn't even bother to read. The way we do it in doctrine-bundle is automatically close only those issues which were marked by maintainer that they need a response from OP.

[bhushan]

So are we not going to do something about too many PRs and issues.. ? If this is the case i can review as much as PRs as possible in weekends.. if we dont have activities on them by contributors, what should we do ?

[ostrolucky]

I think it's invalid to close issues only because nobody fixed it yet. Why are you bothered so much about opened issues? There are lot of issues opened because there are lot of bugs/issues, that's the reality. By pretending these issues don't exist and patting ourselves on the back about reducing opened issues, we are shooting ourselves in the foot by no longer having list of unsolved bugs. What should indeed happen is that somebody triages these issues so it's clear if they are legit and somebody can actually work on them.

[beberlei]

I do not think we should close issues or PRs. Its valuable to see something has not been resolved

[mpdude]

Old issues may have been resolved or PRs be obsoleted/fixed by newer ones, without anyone being able to follow up, the OP maybe long gone.

[ostrolucky]

Still same applie what I wrote: Ask the OP to provide more info if you don't have enough and only in case of no response close the issue. Keyword: if you don't have enough info.

[armellin]

Should we close this discussion, since there is no activity since almost three years? ;-)

[derrabus]

🤷🏻‍♂️