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
Avoid spurious api change warnings from automated release PRs	jack-berg	❌	✅	2d
Update dependency java to v26	trask	✅	✅	32d
Update dependency org.jetbrains.kotlin:kotlin-gradle-plugin to v2.3.21	app/renovate	❌	✅	54d

Waiting on approvers

PR	Author	CI	Conflicts	Activity
Deprecate opentracing shim public API	ADITYA-CODE-SOURCE	✅	❌	4d
Merge colliding Prometheus label values	ADITYA-CODE-SOURCE	✅	✅	4d
profiles: improve JFR export example	jhalliday	✅	✅	10d
Update prometheusServerVersion to v1.6.1	app/renovate	❌	✅	?
Move otlp utilities to otlp package	jack-berg	✅	❌	4d
Protect against index out of bounds exception	jack-berg	❌	✅	17d
Make snakeyaml-engine and jackson-databind optional at runtime	zeitlinger	✅	❌	19d
Use setup-gradle w/ cache-provider: basic to use more permissive MIT …	jack-berg	✅	❌	34d
Add fallback endpoint support for OTLP exporters	sridharsurvi1	❌	❌	25d
Add JSON pretty-print to logging-otlp exporters	lucacavenaghi97	✅	✅	59d
Add a ConfigProvider callback for runtime instrumentation option changes	jackshirazi	❌	✅	4d
Make StandardComponentId constructor public	brunobat	✅	❌	193d
[DO NOT MERGE] JFR API usage	jhalliday	❌	✅	38d

Waiting on authors

PR	Author	CI	Conflicts	Activity
Collect async exemplars when exemplar filter is always_on	ADITYA-CODE-SOURCE	✅	✅	2d
Limit exemplar label characters to conform to Prometheus limits	anuq	✅	✅	1d
Move delta record/collect coordination from instrument to series level	jack-berg	❌	✅	2d
Add missing set value attribute shortcuts	trask	✅	✅	0d
Replace ArrayBlockingQueue with park/unpark for BatchSpanProcessor$Worker	Khepu	✅	✅	17d
Limit prometheus exemplar labels	harshitrjpt	✅	❌	1d

Waiting on external

PR	Author	CI	Conflicts	Activity
Update junit-framework monorepo	app/renovate	❌	✅	3d
Update dependency java to v26	app/renovate	❌	✅	19d

Diagnostics

PR #8387
facts: approved=True conflicts=no days_since_last_activity=2
threads: author=0 reviewer=0 external=0 none=0 unclear=0
route: maintainer

PR #8377
facts: approved=False conflicts=no days_since_last_activity=3
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 progress is blocked on an upstream bndtools release outside this repository.)
route: external

PR #8373
facts: approved=False conflicts=yes days_since_last_activity=4
threads: author=0 reviewer=0 external=0 none=0 unclear=0
route: approver

PR #8364
facts: approved=False conflicts=no days_since_last_activity=4
threads: author=0 reviewer=0 external=0 none=1 unclear=0
llm: pr-conversation -> none (The reviewer asked to park the PR due to overlap with #8346, and the author acknowledged that. No further action is currently needed on this thread until the other PR settles.)
route: approver

PR #8363
facts: approved=False conflicts=no days_since_last_activity=2
threads: author=1 reviewer=0 external=0 none=0 unclear=0
llm: PRRT_kwDOCkv3g86Avr6A -> author (The approver requested specific test additions and extra default-case assertions, so the PR author needs to implement those changes.)
route: author

PR #8362
facts: approved=False conflicts=no days_since_last_activity=1
threads: author=2 reviewer=0 external=0 none=0 unclear=0
llm: PRRT_kwDOCkv3g86A2FZf -> author (An outsider pointed out the implementation should likely use `codePointCount` instead of `length`, implying the author needs to adjust the code.)
llm: PRRT_kwDOCkv3g86A2G81 -> author (A reviewer asked the author to consider converting the new tests to parameterized tests, so the next action is on the PR author to respond or make the change.)
route: author

PR #8349
facts: approved=False conflicts=no days_since_last_activity=10
threads: author=0 reviewer=1 external=0 none=0 unclear=0
llm: pr-conversation -> reviewer (The author is asking the profiling maintainers/spec reviewers for guidance on semconv recommendations and the wire-spec handling, so the next step is on reviewers to answer or decide.)
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=yes days_since_last_activity=4
threads: author=0 reviewer=1 external=0 none=0 unclear=0
llm: pr-conversation -> reviewer (The author is asking the approver team to take a look, so the next move is on reviewers/maintainers.)
route: approver

PR #8313
facts: approved=False conflicts=no days_since_last_activity=2
threads: author=1 reviewer=1 external=0 none=1 unclear=0
llm: PRRT_kwDOCkv3g858njQs -> none (The author’s comment is explanatory and doesn’t request any follow-up or change, so no action is needed on this thread.)
llm: PRRT_kwDOCkv3g858nkV1 -> author (The author notes a TODO to revert or make the test configurable before merging, so the remaining follow-up is on the author.)
llm: PRRT_kwDOCkv3g86AVPvC -> reviewer (The author explains a test change and why it was made, which reads as a response to prior feedback; the next step is for a reviewer to check the updated approach.)
route: author

PR #8294
facts: approved=False conflicts=no days_since_last_activity=17
threads: author=0 reviewer=0 external=0 none=0 unclear=0
route: approver

PR #8270
facts: approved=False conflicts=yes days_since_last_activity=19
threads: author=0 reviewer=0 external=0 none=1 unclear=0
llm: PRRT_kwDOCkv3g857PtCt -> none (The reviewer gave the design feedback, and the author acknowledged it and agreed to keep this as a follow-up; no further reply or action is requested in the thread.)
route: approver

PR #8261
facts: approved=True conflicts=no days_since_last_activity=32
threads: author=0 reviewer=0 external=0 none=2 unclear=0
llm: PRRT_kwDOCkv3g855XQ2Y -> none (The author asked whether Zulu would work; the approver replied "Fine with me," so the question is answered and no further follow-up is implied.)
llm: PRRT_kwDOCkv3g855rwM4 -> none (An approver asked for clarification, and the same approver later approved after the thread, so it appears informational/non-blocking with no remaining action.)
route: maintainer

PR #8256
facts: approved=False conflicts=yes days_since_last_activity=34
threads: author=0 reviewer=1 external=0 none=0 unclear=0
llm: pr-conversation -> reviewer (The reviewer asked for the benefit, and the author answered with rationale plus follow-up evidence about the TOU dependency, so the thread is back in the reviewer’s court.)
route: approver

PR #8255
facts: approved=True conflicts=no days_since_last_activity=0
threads: author=1 reviewer=0 external=0 none=0 unclear=0
llm: PRRT_kwDOCkv3g857fR2F -> author (The author requested a comment change (“add comment here and elsewhere”), and the latest reply is just a ping from the approver, so the thread still needs the author to update the code.)
route: author

PR #8240
facts: approved=False conflicts=no days_since_last_activity=17
threads: author=1 reviewer=0 external=0 none=0 unclear=0
llm: pr-conversation -> author (Reviewer asked for before/after benchmark results, and the author’s latest comment says they still need to figure out how to run the relevant benchmarks and gather those metrics.)
route: author

PR #8232
facts: approved=False conflicts=no days_since_last_activity=19
threads: author=0 reviewer=0 external=1 none=0 unclear=0
llm: pr-conversation -> external (The approver says the PR is blocked because GraalVM setup cannot download a Java 26 artifact yet, so progress depends on upstream support outside this repository.)
route: external

PR #8197
facts: approved=False conflicts=yes days_since_last_activity=25
threads: author=0 reviewer=0 external=0 none=1 unclear=0
llm: pr-conversation -> none (The reviewer already said the PR can stay as a reference implementation, and the author’s last reply only shared the spec issue link without asking for anything further.)
route: approver

PR #8164
facts: approved=False conflicts=no days_since_last_activity=59
threads: author=0 reviewer=2 external=0 none=0 unclear=0
llm: PRRT_kwDOCkv3g85z-n0C -> reviewer (An approver raised a spec/naming concern and explicitly asked for input from the Java/configuration approvers, so the next step is on reviewers/maintainers.)
llm: pr-conversation -> reviewer (The author says they are waiting for approver feedback, so the next step is on the reviewer/approver side.)
route: approver

PR #8076
facts: approved=False conflicts=no days_since_last_activity=4
threads: author=0 reviewer=1 external=0 none=1 unclear=0
llm: PRRT_kwDOCkv3g85-kTBF -> none (The reviewer’s comment was a non-blocking optimization suggestion, and the author replied that it was added. No further action is indicated in the thread.)
llm: pr-conversation -> reviewer (The latest comment is the author asking how an extension can call `setConfig`, so the ball is back in the reviewer/maintainer court to answer or advise.)
route: approver

PR #7924
facts: approved=True conflicts=no days_since_last_activity=54
threads: author=0 reviewer=0 external=0 none=0 unclear=0
route: maintainer

PR #7763
facts: approved=False conflicts=yes days_since_last_activity=193
threads: author=0 reviewer=1 external=0 none=0 unclear=0
llm: pr-conversation -> reviewer (The reviewer asked for justification, and the author answered; the thread is now back in reviewer court to assess whether the explanation is sufficient.)
route: approver

PR #7741
facts: approved=False conflicts=no days_since_last_activity=38
threads: author=0 reviewer=0 external=0 none=1 unclear=0
llm: pr-conversation -> none (The latest comment is just an external pointer to a possible bridge implementation, with no explicit request for the author or reviewer to do anything next.)
route: approver

PR #6791
facts: approved=False conflicts=yes days_since_last_activity=1
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 जवाब/justify the implementation.)
llm: PRRT_kwDOCkv3g85aSnh9 -> author (Reviewer requested an added test to cover the change, so the PR author needs to implement it.)
llm: pr-conversation -> none (The comment is just an FYI linking another PR and doesn’t request any action in this thread.)
route: author

Generated 2026-05-11 07:24 UTC