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
Remove all shared internal code refs from zipkin exporter	jack-berg	✅	✅	1d

Waiting on approvers

PR	Author	CI	Conflicts	Activity
docs: clarify View attribute filtering interaction with Exemplars	kyyril	✅	✅	0d
Update dependency org.mock-server:mockserver-netty to v6	app/renovate	❌	✅	?
Fix Groovy OpenTelemetrySdk builder loading	ADITYA-CODE-SOURCE	✅	✅	3d
profiles: improve JFR export example	jhalliday	✅	✅	1d
Use setup-gradle w/ cache-provider: basic to use more permissive MIT …	jack-berg	✅	❌	45d
Add a ConfigProvider callback for runtime instrumentation option changes	jackshirazi	❌	❌	15d
Make StandardComponentId constructor public	brunobat	✅	❌	204d

Waiting on authors

PR	Author	CI	Conflicts	Activity
Finish adding OSGi support	jack-berg	✅	✅	0d
Commit declarative config schema pojos to git	jack-berg	❌	✅	7d
Merge colliding Prometheus label values	ADITYA-CODE-SOURCE	✅	✅	7d
Limit exemplar label characters to conform to Prometheus limits	anuq	✅	✅	3d
Make snakeyaml-engine and jackson-databind optional at runtime	zeitlinger	✅	❌	30d
Update dependency java to v26	trask	✅	✅	43d
Replace ArrayBlockingQueue with park/unpark for BatchSpanProcessor$Worker	Khepu	✅	✅	28d
Add JSON pretty-print to logging-otlp exporters	lucacavenaghi97	✅	✅	1d
[DO NOT MERGE] JFR API usage	jhalliday	❌	✅	49d
Limit prometheus exemplar labels	harshitrjpt	✅	❌	12d

Waiting on external

PR	Author	CI	Conflicts	Activity
Update junit-framework monorepo - abandoned	app/renovate	❌	❌	14d
Update dependency java to v26	app/renovate	❌	✅	30d
Add fallback endpoint support for OTLP exporters	sridharsurvi1	❌	❌	36d

Diagnostics

PR #8419
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 says they updated the Javadoc and asks the reviewer to check it: "Let me know if it looks good.")
route: approver

PR #8418
facts: approved=False conflicts=no days_since_last_activity=None
threads: author=0 reviewer=0 external=0 none=0 unclear=0
route: approver

PR #8417
facts: approved=False conflicts=no days_since_last_activity=0
threads: author=1 reviewer=0 external=0 none=0 unclear=0
llm: pr-conversation -> author (The author acknowledged the remaining OSGi issue and said they will fix the mandatory SPI import and check for similar cases, so the next step is on the author.)
route: author

PR #8413
facts: approved=True conflicts=no days_since_last_activity=1
threads: author=0 reviewer=0 external=0 none=2 unclear=0
llm: PRRT_kwDOCkv3g86C7dSe -> none (The author is only explaining that the test line verifies coverage; no follow-up or action is requested from either side.)
llm: PRRT_kwDOCkv3g86Dgb4W -> none (The author only left an FYI about downstream agent changes and did not ask for review or request a code change, so this thread is informational.)
route: maintainer

PR #8408
facts: approved=False conflicts=no days_since_last_activity=7
threads: author=3 reviewer=2 external=0 none=0 unclear=0
llm: PRRT_kwDOCkv3g86CKKVv -> reviewer (The author is just clarifying what should be reviewed in this file; no implementation or follow-up from the author is requested, so the next step is for a reviewer to inspect it.)
llm: PRRT_kwDOCkv3g86CKMLE -> reviewer (The author has already responded with an explanation for the flagged boxed-primitive comparison, so the thread is back with the reviewer to accept the explanation or ask for changes.)
llm: PRRT_kwDOCkv3g86CKN7v -> author (The only comment is from the PR author, who says they want to evaluate changing the constructor/Jackson behavior; that implies follow-up work or investigation is still on the author.)
llm: PRRT_kwDOCkv3g86CKPJM -> author (The latest comment is from the author and asks to investigate renaming the generated methods to `set*`, so the author has the next action.)
llm: PRRT_kwDOCkv3g86CKPwd -> author (The latest comment is from the PR author and says they want to change the `toString` implementation and investigate related formatting/configuration, so the next step is on the author to implement that follow-up.)
route: author

PR #8407
facts: approved=False conflicts=no days_since_last_activity=3
threads: author=0 reviewer=1 external=0 none=1 unclear=0
llm: PRRT_kwDOCkv3g86CMfQS -> reviewer (The reviewer requested justification comments, and the author responded that they added them in a follow-up commit, so the thread is now back in reviewer court for confirmation.)
llm: PRRT_kwDOCkv3g86CMnfF -> none (The author answered the question by explaining why `Object` was used, and no further change or response was requested in the thread.)
route: approver

PR #8377
facts: approved=False conflicts=yes days_since_last_activity=14
threads: author=0 reviewer=0 external=1 none=0 unclear=0
llm: PRRT_kwDOCkv3g86Ab-gj -> external (The approver says to wait for the real bnd 7.3.0 release before merging, so progress is blocked on an upstream release outside this repository.)
route: external

PR #8364
facts: approved=False conflicts=no days_since_last_activity=7
threads: author=3 reviewer=0 external=0 none=0 unclear=0
llm: PRRT_kwDOCkv3g86BhQsA -> author (The approver requested a code change: add a clarifying comment and rework the test strategy to avoid the extra allocation unless a collision occurs.)
llm: PRRT_kwDOCkv3g86BhVsZ -> author (The approver flagged a gap in the implementation and is requesting the PR author to extend collision handling beyond `attributes` to other attribute sources like `resource`, `scope`, and `additionalAttributes`.)
llm: pr-conversation -> author (The author said they will rebase, apply requested changes, and re-request review once the blocking PR settles, so the next step is on the author.)
route: author

PR #8362
facts: approved=False conflicts=no days_since_last_activity=3
threads: author=1 reviewer=0 external=0 none=1 unclear=0
llm: PRRT_kwDOCkv3g86C-hHG -> none (This is a nitty, optional suggestion about using `Named` for readability, not a requested blocking change, so no follow-up is required.)
llm: PRRT_kwDOCkv3g86C-jIw -> author (A reviewer left a concrete nit requesting a code change (`short` -> `short_attr`), so the PR author needs to update the test.)
route: author

PR #8349
facts: approved=False conflicts=no days_since_last_activity=1
threads: author=0 reviewer=0 external=0 none=0 unclear=0
route: approver

PR #8270
facts: approved=False conflicts=yes days_since_last_activity=30
threads: author=1 reviewer=0 external=0 none=0 unclear=0
llm: PRRT_kwDOCkv3g857PtCt -> author (The reviewer asked for the design to stay internal for now, and the author agreed to keep this PR as a follow-up, so the remaining action is for the author to revise or recreate the PR.)
route: author

PR #8261
facts: approved=True conflicts=no days_since_last_activity=43
threads: author=1 reviewer=0 external=0 none=1 unclear=0
llm: PRRT_kwDOCkv3g855XQ2Y -> none (The author asked whether zulu would work, and the approver replied “Fine with me,” so there’s no explicit follow-up or requested change left in the thread.)
llm: PRRT_kwDOCkv3g855rwM4 -> author (The approver asked for clarification with “What’s this?”, so the PR author needs to explain or adjust the change.)
route: author

PR #8256
facts: approved=False conflicts=yes days_since_last_activity=45
threads: author=0 reviewer=1 external=0 none=0 unclear=0
llm: pr-conversation -> reviewer (The reviewer asked for the benefit, and the author replied with rationale and cited evidence, so the thread is back in reviewer court for a response/decision.)
route: approver

PR #8240
facts: approved=False conflicts=no days_since_last_activity=28
threads: author=1 reviewer=0 external=0 none=0 unclear=0
llm: pr-conversation -> author (The reviewers asked for before/after benchmark results, and the author’s latest reply says they will investigate the zero metrics and try again, so the next action is with the author.)
route: author

PR #8232
facts: approved=False conflicts=no days_since_last_activity=30
threads: author=0 reviewer=0 external=1 none=0 unclear=0
llm: pr-conversation -> external (The approver says the PR is blocked by the GraalVM action lacking a usable Java 26 artifact, which is an upstream dependency issue outside this repository.)
route: external

PR #8197
facts: approved=False conflicts=yes days_since_last_activity=36
threads: author=0 reviewer=0 external=1 none=0 unclear=0
llm: pr-conversation -> external (The thread is waiting on the linked OpenTelemetry specification discussion (#4973), so progress depends on an external spec decision rather than an in-repo action.)
route: external

PR #8164
facts: approved=False conflicts=no days_since_last_activity=1
threads: author=1 reviewer=0 external=0 none=0 unclear=0
llm: PRRT_kwDOCkv3g85z-n0C -> author (A reviewer requested a code change to use the new `pretty_print/development_java` config naming, and the follow-up comment only endorsed that convention; the implementation still needs to be made by the PR author.)
route: author

PR #8076
facts: approved=False conflicts=yes days_since_last_activity=15
threads: author=0 reviewer=1 external=0 none=1 unclear=0
llm: PRRT_kwDOCkv3g85-kTBF -> none (The reviewer only suggested a TODO for a future optimization, and the author replied "added". This is informational/non-blocking with no further action requested.)
llm: pr-conversation -> reviewer (The author’s latest comment asks a direct question about how to call `setConfig` from an extension, so the next step is for a reviewer/maintainer to answer and guide the design.)
route: approver

PR #7763
facts: approved=False conflicts=yes days_since_last_activity=204
threads: author=0 reviewer=1 external=0 none=0 unclear=0
llm: pr-conversation -> reviewer (The reviewer asked why the change is needed, and the author answered with a justification. The thread is now back in the reviewer’s court to decide whether that explanation is sufficient.)
route: approver

PR #7741
facts: approved=False conflicts=no days_since_last_activity=49
threads: author=1 reviewer=0 external=0 none=0 unclear=0
llm: pr-conversation -> author (The last comment is an informational external suggestion with a direct request for the author’s opinion (“Let me know what you think”), so the next move is for the PR author to respond or decide whether to use it.)
route: author

PR #6791
facts: approved=False conflicts=yes days_since_last_activity=12
threads: author=2 reviewer=0 external=0 none=1 unclear=0
llm: PRRT_kwDOCkv3g85aSnGV -> author (The approver is asking for specification support, so the author needs to जवाब with a reference or justification for the limit.)
llm: PRRT_kwDOCkv3g85aSnh9 -> author (The approver asked for an added test, and the thread is unresolved, so the PR author needs to implement that coverage.)
llm: pr-conversation -> none (The comment is only an FYI linking another PR that addresses the same issue; it does not ask for any action or decision in this thread.)
route: author

Generated 2026-05-22 07:24 UTC