Pull Request Dashboard

[github-actions]

Note

Open PRs are grouped by deterministic routing over per-thread LLM classifications. CI, conflicts, and activity age are computed deterministically and are shown as facts, not used as standalone routing reasons.

Waiting on maintainer (approved)

PR	Author	CI	Conflicts	Activity
Deprecate opentracing shim public API	ADITYA-CODE-SOURCE	❌	✅	0d
Update dependency org.jetbrains.kotlin:kotlin-gradle-plugin to v2.3.21	app/renovate	❌	✅	57d

Waiting on approvers

PR	Author	CI	Conflicts	Activity
Update dependency com.squareup.wire:wire-bom to v6.3.0	app/renovate	✅	✅	?
Update armeriaVersion to v1.39.0	app/renovate	✅	✅	0d
Fix declarative config model package	jack-berg	✅	✅	0d
OSGi support and tests for OTLP exporters	jack-berg	✅	✅	0d
Remove deprecated ExtendedAttributes and related code	jack-berg	✅	✅	1d
Remove view file config mechanism	jack-berg	✅	✅	0d
profiles: improve JFR export example	jhalliday	✅	✅	13d
Update prometheusServerVersion to v1.6.1	app/renovate	❌	✅	?
Move otlp utilities to otlp package	jack-berg	✅	✅	1d
Move delta record/collect coordination from instrument to series level	jack-berg	✅	✅	0d
Protect against index out of bounds exception	jack-berg	❌	✅	19d
Make snakeyaml-engine and jackson-databind optional at runtime	zeitlinger	✅	❌	21d
Use setup-gradle w/ cache-provider: basic to use more permissive MIT …	jack-berg	✅	❌	36d
Add a ConfigProvider callback for runtime instrumentation option changes	jackshirazi	❌	✅	7d
Make StandardComponentId constructor public	brunobat	✅	❌	196d
[DO NOT MERGE] JFR API usage	jhalliday	❌	✅	40d

Waiting on authors

PR	Author	CI	Conflicts	Activity
Merge colliding Prometheus label values	ADITYA-CODE-SOURCE	✅	✅	1d
Limit exemplar label characters to conform to Prometheus limits	anuq	✅	✅	4d
Update dependency java to v26	trask	✅	✅	34d
Replace ArrayBlockingQueue with park/unpark for BatchSpanProcessor$Worker	Khepu	✅	✅	20d
Add JSON pretty-print to logging-otlp exporters	lucacavenaghi97	✅	✅	61d
Limit prometheus exemplar labels	harshitrjpt	✅	❌	4d

Waiting on external

PR	Author	CI	Conflicts	Activity
Update junit-framework monorepo	app/renovate	❌	❌	5d
Update dependency java to v26	app/renovate	❌	✅	22d
Add fallback endpoint support for OTLP exporters	sridharsurvi1	❌	❌	27d

Diagnostics

PR #8405
facts: approved=False conflicts=no days_since_last_activity=None
threads: author=0 reviewer=0 external=0 none=0 unclear=0
route: approver

PR #8404
facts: approved=False conflicts=no days_since_last_activity=0
threads: author=0 reviewer=0 external=0 none=0 unclear=0
route: approver

PR #8403
facts: approved=False conflicts=no days_since_last_activity=0
threads: author=0 reviewer=0 external=0 none=0 unclear=0
route: approver

PR #8401
facts: approved=False conflicts=no days_since_last_activity=0
threads: author=0 reviewer=1 external=0 none=0 unclear=0
llm: pr-conversation -> reviewer (The author is pinging previous reviewers for feedback, so the next step is for a reviewer to respond or review.)
route: approver

PR #8395
facts: approved=False conflicts=no days_since_last_activity=1
threads: author=0 reviewer=0 external=0 none=0 unclear=0
route: approver

PR #8394
facts: approved=False conflicts=no days_since_last_activity=0
threads: author=0 reviewer=0 external=0 none=0 unclear=0
route: approver

PR #8377
facts: approved=False conflicts=yes days_since_last_activity=5
threads: author=0 reviewer=0 external=1 none=0 unclear=0
llm: PRRT_kwDOCkv3g86Ab-gj -> external (The approver says to wait for the real 7.3.0 release before merging, so the thread is blocked on an external upstream release rather than requiring an in-repo response.)
route: external

PR #8373
facts: approved=True conflicts=no days_since_last_activity=0
threads: author=0 reviewer=0 external=0 none=1 unclear=0
llm: pr-conversation -> none (The author addressed the reviewer request by reverting the Graal workaround and only noted the unrelated CI failure as a potential separate follow-up, so no further action is needed in this thread.)
route: maintainer

PR #8364
facts: approved=False conflicts=no days_since_last_activity=1
threads: author=2 reviewer=0 external=0 none=0 unclear=0
llm: PRRT_kwDOCkv3g86BhQsA -> author (The approver asked for a comment and then requested a strategy change to reduce allocation overhead, so the PR author needs to update the test implementation.)
llm: PRRT_kwDOCkv3g86BhVsZ -> author (The approver flagged a required fix: collision handling should include normalized labels from resource, scope, and additionalAttributes, so the PR author needs to update the implementation.)
route: author

PR #8362
facts: approved=False conflicts=no days_since_last_activity=4
threads: author=2 reviewer=0 external=0 none=0 unclear=0
llm: PRRT_kwDOCkv3g86A2FZf -> author (The comment requests a code change in the converter (`codePointCount` instead of `length`), so the author needs to respond by updating the implementation or explaining why not.)
llm: PRRT_kwDOCkv3g86A2G81 -> author (A reviewer asked whether the added unit tests could be converted to parameterized tests, which requests a code change from the PR author.)
route: author

PR #8349
facts: approved=False conflicts=no days_since_last_activity=13
threads: author=0 reviewer=1 external=0 none=0 unclear=0
llm: pr-conversation -> reviewer (The author is asking maintainers for input on spec changes and which definition should win, so the next step is for reviewers/maintainers to जवाब.)
route: approver

PR #8335
facts: approved=False conflicts=no days_since_last_activity=None
threads: author=0 reviewer=0 external=0 none=0 unclear=0
route: approver

PR #8326
facts: approved=False conflicts=no days_since_last_activity=1
threads: author=0 reviewer=1 external=0 none=0 unclear=0
llm: pr-conversation -> reviewer (The author explicitly asks the java approvers to take a look, so the next step is for reviewers/maintainers to review and respond.)
route: approver

PR #8313
facts: approved=False conflicts=no days_since_last_activity=0
threads: author=0 reviewer=1 external=0 none=1 unclear=0
llm: PRRT_kwDOCkv3g858njQs -> none (The author’s comment is explanatory only and does not request review, changes, or external input, so no follow-up is needed.)
llm: PRRT_kwDOCkv3g86AVPvC -> reviewer (The author explained and adjusted the test strategy in response to feedback, so the thread is back in reviewer court for review/approval.)
route: approver

PR #8294
facts: approved=False conflicts=no days_since_last_activity=19
threads: author=0 reviewer=0 external=0 none=0 unclear=0
route: approver

PR #8270
facts: approved=False conflicts=yes days_since_last_activity=21
threads: author=0 reviewer=0 external=0 none=1 unclear=0
llm: PRRT_kwDOCkv3g857PtCt -> none (The reviewer gave design guidance, and the author closed the discussion by agreeing to keep this as a follow-up; no explicit response or change is still requested in this thread.)
route: approver

PR #8261
facts: approved=True conflicts=no days_since_last_activity=34
threads: author=1 reviewer=0 external=0 none=1 unclear=0
llm: PRRT_kwDOCkv3g855XQ2Y -> none (The author asked whether zulu works here; the approver replied “Fine with me,” making it informational with no remaining follow-up.)
llm: PRRT_kwDOCkv3g855rwM4 -> author (The approver asked for clarification with “What’s this?” and there’s no follow-up in the thread, so the PR author needs to जवाब/clarify the code change.)
route: author

PR #8256
facts: approved=False conflicts=yes days_since_last_activity=36
threads: author=0 reviewer=1 external=0 none=0 unclear=0
llm: pr-conversation -> reviewer (The author answered the concern and followed up with evidence, so the thread is now back in the reviewer’s court to confirm or respond.)
route: approver

PR #8240
facts: approved=False conflicts=no days_since_last_activity=20
threads: author=1 reviewer=0 external=0 none=0 unclear=0
llm: pr-conversation -> author (Reviewer requested before/after benchmark results, and the author’s latest reply says they still need to figure out why the benchmark metrics are zero, so the next step is on the author.)
route: author

PR #8232
facts: approved=False conflicts=no days_since_last_activity=22
threads: author=0 reviewer=0 external=1 none=0 unclear=0
llm: pr-conversation -> external (The blocker is upstream GraalVM support for Java 26, not a repo-local change; the update should wait until that external artifact exists.)
route: external

PR #8197
facts: approved=False conflicts=yes days_since_last_activity=27
threads: author=0 reviewer=0 external=1 none=0 unclear=0
llm: pr-conversation -> external (The discussion is now waiting on the separate OpenTelemetry spec issue the author linked, so resolution depends on an external spec decision rather than a repo-local follow-up.)
route: external

PR #8164
facts: approved=False conflicts=no days_since_last_activity=61
threads: author=1 reviewer=1 external=0 none=0 unclear=0
llm: PRRT_kwDOCkv3g85z-n0C -> author (The approver requested a code change to add guardrails for the config key, so the PR author needs to update the implementation.)
llm: pr-conversation -> reviewer (The author is explicitly waiting for approver feedback before making further changes, so the next action is with a reviewer/maintainer.)
route: author

PR #8076
facts: approved=False conflicts=no days_since_last_activity=7
threads: author=0 reviewer=2 external=0 none=0 unclear=0
llm: PRRT_kwDOCkv3g85-kTBF -> reviewer (The reviewer suggested adding a TODO to defer the expensive comparison, and the author replied “added,” indicating the requested change was made and the thread is back for reviewer review/closure.)
llm: pr-conversation -> reviewer (The author’s latest comment asks how an extension can call `setConfig`, so the thread is waiting on reviewer guidance or a design answer.)
route: approver

PR #7924
facts: approved=True conflicts=no days_since_last_activity=57
threads: author=0 reviewer=0 external=0 none=0 unclear=0
route: maintainer

PR #7763
facts: approved=False conflicts=yes days_since_last_activity=196
threads: author=0 reviewer=1 external=0 none=0 unclear=0
llm: pr-conversation -> reviewer (The reviewer asked for justification, and the author replied with the rationale; the thread is now back with the reviewer to react or decide whether the explanation is sufficient.)
route: approver

PR #7741
facts: approved=False conflicts=no days_since_last_activity=40
threads: author=0 reviewer=0 external=0 none=1 unclear=0
llm: pr-conversation -> none (The latest reply is just an informational external suggestion, and no explicit follow-up or requested change is left for either side.)
route: approver

PR #6791
facts: approved=False conflicts=yes days_since_last_activity=4
threads: author=2 reviewer=0 external=0 none=1 unclear=0
llm: PRRT_kwDOCkv3g85aSnGV -> author (A reviewer asked whether the change is based on a specification, so the author needs to respond with the source or clarification.)
llm: PRRT_kwDOCkv3g85aSnh9 -> author (The approver requested an additional test, so the PR author needs to implement it.)
llm: pr-conversation -> none (The only comment is an FYI linking another PR on the same issue; it does not request a change or reply in this thread.)
route: author

Generated 2026-05-13 19:38 UTC