You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
As many, I want to start contributing to the project by finding un-claimed issues. However, by the way the repo is set up, finding them is difficult.
Taking advantage of the GH-XXXX convention, I think we should have an automated action on PR creation/renaming that extracts the issue number and assigns it to the PR, so that it is visible from the issue list.
I would like to work on this, but want to know other people's opinions/alternatives.
I think we should have an automated action on PR creation/renaming that extracts the issue number and assigns it to the PR, so that it is visible from the issue list.
Bedevere already adds linked prs to the issue description. An example: python/cpython#150045 (see "Linked PRs" section). Maybe we could add some labels, that track the issue has some open prs, or that all linked PRs are merged (perhaps, it's a case to add "pending" label). Though, I'm not sure if this will be helpful.
But keep in mind, that issue can have multiple prs. Not only backports: some issues are complex and prs address them only partially. That means, if issue has linked prs - it doesn't mean you can't contribute.
Yes, basically GitHub allows you to "link" PRs to issues. What this basically means is that the PR shows up on the Development section of the issue. This is useful because:
It shows the related PR(s) in a standarized way that is easier to track
It allows to close the issue when the PR gets merged
On the issue list, it identifies issues that already have linked PRs, making it easier to discover those who don't (either through the UI, the API, or using agents).
When you merge a linked pull request into the default branch of a repository, its linked issue is automatically closed.
That's certainly so, if you link to issues, using keywords. Does it "works" in same way to manually linked issues? If so, I don't think it's acceptable for CPython: as I said, issue can have multiple prs.
Yes. You are right. I now realize there is not a 1:1 relationship. Maybe we could do something like a "has PR" label (non intrusive, and as you say, people can still contribute, comment or make follow up PRs)
Activity
skirpichev commentedon May 21, 2026
Bedevere already adds linked prs to the issue description. An example: python/cpython#150045 (see "Linked PRs" section). Maybe we could add some labels, that track the issue has some open prs, or that all linked PRs are merged (perhaps, it's a case to add "pending" label). Though, I'm not sure if this will be helpful.
But keep in mind, that issue can have multiple prs. Not only backports: some issues are complex and prs address them only partially. That means, if issue has linked prs - it doesn't mean you can't contribute.
So far, I don't see a clear proposal from you.
skirpichev commentedon May 21, 2026
Perhaps, it's a duplicate of #581
hugovk commentedon May 21, 2026
Thanks for the suggestion.
Please could you clarify what assigning an issue to a PR means?
Is it a GitHub feature? Can you show some screnshots/links to how it's used in other repos, and link the docs?
edvilme commentedon May 21, 2026
Hi, thanks for your reply.
Yes, basically GitHub allows you to "link" PRs to issues. What this basically means is that the PR shows up on the Development section of the issue. This is useful because:
See https://github.com/proxy/docs.github.com/en/issues/tracking-your-work-with-issues/using-issues/linking-a-pull-request-to-an-issue
=================
I was thinking different approaches:
I am personally happier with option 1 but don't know if that has been explored already.
skirpichev commentedon May 21, 2026
Docs says:
That's certainly so, if you link to issues, using keywords. Does it "works" in same way to manually linked issues? If so, I don't think it's acceptable for CPython: as I said, issue can have multiple prs.
edvilme commentedon May 25, 2026
Yes. You are right. I now realize there is not a 1:1 relationship. Maybe we could do something like a "has PR" label (non intrusive, and as you say, people can still contribute, comment or make follow up PRs)