Reviewing pull requests

[Brad Roberts]

On 3/24/14, 1:48 PM, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
> On Mon, 24 Mar 2014 16:11:34 -0400, Andrej Mitrovic <andrej.mitrovich at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Monday, 24 March 2014 at 20:02:51 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
>>> The single most impactful way to improve D some more at this point is, without a shred of doubt,
>>> reviewing pull requests on github.
>>
>> I've been through most Phobos pulls several times now in the last few months, and from what I can
>> tell a lot of pulls seem to be stalled by the pull authors themselves rather than a lack of
>> reviewers. Someone makes a pull, it gets reviewed but turns out the pull needs more work, and then
>> the author disappears from the face of the earth.
>
> 2 things:
>
> 1. Pulls that are waiting for author changes, but haven't been touched in a week (maybe?) should be
> closed. They can always be reopened.
> 2. Pulls that are closed do not get tested, so they are not using up cycles on the auto tester.

Older than 2 weeks and they aren't likely to get tested either.. since any change to the branch (ie, 
a pull being merged) restarts testing, so they're effectively just dead weight down the queue.  Only 
a lull in pull merging would allow them to be tested, which is fine since a lull in activity would 
otherwise just result in idle testers.  So, really #2 is a non-issue.