Clarify stale label#677
Conversation
|
The stale label is nowadays added by |
|
Are you suggesting to simplify the label description even more? Something like: Used for PRs that hasn't had any activity in a long period of time. This label helps core developers quickly identify PRs that are candidates for closure, for review or require a ping to the author. |
hugovk
left a comment
hugovk
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Are you suggesting to simplify the label description even more?
Something like: Used for PRs that hasn't had any activity in a long period of time. This label helps core developers quickly identify PRs that are candidates for closure, for review or require a ping to the author.
That sounds good to me, it includes the "candidate for review" possibility too.
Except also include this grammar fix and let's explicitly mention the 30 days:
-Used for PRs that hasn't had any activity in a long period of time.
+Used for PRs that haven't had any activity in 30 days.
4 participants
It seems, most recent "stale" issues got that label just because were unreviewed. Trying to document this...