-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 27
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Remove stale action #287
Labels
ci/cd
Continuous integration and continuous delivery/deployment changes
Comments
jsstevenson
added
the
ci/cd
Continuous integration and continuous delivery/deployment changes
label
Nov 20, 2023
I'm pro removing it. I think that since we are constantly switching between projects, that this does not make sense for the current @ga4gh/vrs-python-maintainers . |
Who am I to argue with our @ga4gh/vrs-python-maintainers? Remove it. 👍 |
korikuzma
added a commit
that referenced
this issue
Dec 5, 2023
korikuzma
added a commit
that referenced
this issue
Jan 8, 2024
korikuzma
added a commit
that referenced
this issue
Jan 8, 2024
korikuzma
added a commit
that referenced
this issue
Jan 8, 2024
korikuzma
added a commit
that referenced
this issue
Jan 8, 2024
korikuzma
added a commit
that referenced
this issue
Jan 8, 2024
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
As far as I can tell, the stale action has not, at least in recent years, actually closed an issue -- all closures have been manual (mostly by @korikuzma and @theferrit32). On the flip side, we've currently marked almost every open issue as
stale-exempt
. Is this action still a useful part of the workflow? Would it make sense to at least alter the configuration (maybe lengthendays-before-issue-stale
) if not remove it entirely?The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: