>  2. Bot to backport PRs (which could also be automatically merged)
So, to me, this is the priority item on the list.

I'm planning to work on the cherry-pick bot this during the core sprint in September. Unless someone beat me to it.

Automatically close stale PRs (e.g. not signing CLA, changes
    requested but not being made, etc.)

This is also in my sprint plan, but only if I finish the cherry-pick bot :) 
Further discussion can be done here: https://github.com/python/core-workflow/issues/93

What does 'close' (without merging) mean?

The PR will be closed. The branch containing the changeset will still be available in the contributor's fork of CPython.
Unless they delete it too.

On GitHub You can search for PRs that are closed but not merged by using the filters: 
is:pr is:closed is:unmerged

A list of closed PRs that were not merged

I believe the reopening the PR straight-forward: click on the "Reopen pull request" button.

Mariatta Wijaya

On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 4:01 PM, Brett Cannon <brett@python.org> wrote:

On Tue, 18 Jul 2017 at 12:54 Barry Warsaw <barry@python.org> wrote:
On Jul 18, 2017, at 15:21, R. David Murray <rdmurray@bitdance.com> wrote:
> I much prefer rietveld over github reviews, but I also much prefer the
> integration between the bug tracker and github over the minimal
> integration we had for rietveld.  Thanks to all the people who made
> that happen, and especially Brett for leading it.

Not that I’m suggesting anything should change, but just FWIW, I find Gitlab to have a much better conversational review tool than Github.  I often find myself getting lost in GH reviews (on many projects), but GL just organizes the conversation really well IMHO.

It's very obvious, Barry, that you're playing the long game of trying to line up GitLab as the next platform once we grow tired of GitHub and need to switch in a few years. I'm on to you. ;)

python-committers mailing list
Code of Conduct: https://www.python.org/psf/codeofconduct/