"Cleaning up of open pull requests" initiative

[actionless]

1. if you see any PR which don't have any open questions, no merge conflicts and green ci status ✅ - but which is blocked by a lack of approval - double-check if you reviewed it yourself or if someone else's review is missing - please post a link to this topic, so it would easier to quickly discover it

2. if you see a PR which have unresolved questions from the maintainers/unfixed tests/so on for more than 1 year - please close it with the status submitter gone

CC @awesomeWM/write-access

P.S. ideally it would be to do the same with need-info issues which still remain open - but such thing prolly would be easier to address with a GH issues bot - i was recently writing such for Pikaur, so i could write a bot for awesome wm which would be weekly closing issues with need-info status which are older than year (or of course any other condition/s on which we would agre)

[sclu1034]

If the lack of maintenance the past couple of years is indication of anything, then merely posting this "initiative" into the void is not going to make anything happen. If you want to change that, you'll have to lead by example, and be the first to start merging some PRs (here are the ones not yet reviewed by you: https://github.com/awesomeWM/awesome/pulls?q=sort%3Acreated-desc+is%3Apr+is%3Aopen+-reviewed-by%3Aactionless+-author%3Aactionless).

Except that this initiative is only going to be a band aid. Issues and PRs piling up is merely the symptom of the underlying issue of, again, lack of maintenance.
There have been 20 PRs merged in the last 12 months, the vast majority of which are some variation of "fix typo in docs". That's like trying to build a house by showing up once a month, putting two bricks on the wall, then going back home because the tea water finished boiling.

This project is essentially dead. Trying to get PRs or issues closed just for the sake of making the numbers in the header smaller is not going to change that. And some idea like "less issues == less work for maintainers" is meaningless, if those maintainers never do the work either way.

At this point, you and the other maintainers have two options:

• Accept that none of you have the motivation to keep this project going (which is totally fine, interests and priorities change), find someone to take over and move on with your life
• Accept that maintaining a project requires more than 0 effort, pick up the slack and start actually doing something. Once you're willing to do more than just wave through changes with less than 10 LOC, there are plenty of meaningful issues to make a decision on, and substantial feature PRs to tackle.

Because at the current rate, the only thing that's happening is blowing hot air into the void with zero actions to back it up, while the CI workflow is a dead fish in the water for almost three months, now. Decision making, in particular, has not been happening in any meaningful way the past few years.

[actionless]

you just like ChatGPT's new "Monday" model - amazing in generating walls of sad passively aggressive text with small meaning

i'm not really into pointless discussion of what is a criteria of alive project. if this won't be posted as an offtopic i might explain why your points are not correct. but this topic about smth else, if you can't help - it's unwelcome to derail the conversation

[sicelo]

great initiative! thank you.

there's this MR, but you already approved it, so not sure if it fits the criteria above: #3979 (yes it's selfish because it's mine)

who are other maintainers? is it possible for them to also get on board with this great initiative?