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	✅	✅	6d

Waiting on approvers

PR	Author	CI	Conflicts	Activity
Update weekly update	app/renovate	✅	✅	?
Update all patch and minor versions	app/renovate	❌	✅	?
Bound OkHttp sender dispatchers and surface rejections	ADITYA-CODE-SOURCE	✅	✅	3d
Update dependency org.mock-server:mockserver-netty to v6	app/renovate	❌	✅	?
Fix Groovy OpenTelemetrySdk builder loading	ADITYA-CODE-SOURCE	✅	✅	7d
Limit exemplar label characters to conform to Prometheus limits	anuq	✅	✅	2d
profiles: improve JFR export example	jhalliday	✅	✅	6d
Make snakeyaml-engine and jackson-databind optional at runtime	zeitlinger	✅	❌	34d
Use setup-gradle w/ cache-provider: basic to use more permissive MIT …	jack-berg	✅	❌	49d
Add a ConfigProvider callback for runtime instrumentation option changes	jackshirazi	❌	❌	19d
Make StandardComponentId constructor public	brunobat	✅	❌	208d

Waiting on authors

PR	Author	CI	Conflicts	Activity
Finish adding OSGi support	jack-berg	✅	✅	3d
Commit declarative config schema pojos to git	jack-berg	❌	✅	11d
Merge colliding Prometheus label values	ADITYA-CODE-SOURCE	✅	✅	11d
Update dependency java to v26	trask	✅	✅	47d
Replace ArrayBlockingQueue with park/unpark for BatchSpanProcessor$Worker	Khepu	✅	✅	33d
Add JSON pretty-print to logging-otlp exporters	lucacavenaghi97	✅	✅	6d
[DO NOT MERGE] JFR API usage	jhalliday	❌	✅	53d
Limit prometheus exemplar labels	harshitrjpt	✅	❌	16d

Waiting on external

PR	Author	CI	Conflicts	Activity
Update junit-framework monorepo - abandoned	app/renovate	❌	❌	18d
Update dependency java to v26	app/renovate	❌	✅	34d
Add fallback endpoint support for OTLP exporters	sridharsurvi1	❌	❌	40d

Diagnostics

PR #8424
facts: approved=False conflicts=no days_since_last_activity=None
threads: author=0 reviewer=0 external=0 none=0 unclear=0
route: approver

PR #8423
facts: approved=False conflicts=no days_since_last_activity=None
threads: author=0 reviewer=0 external=0 none=0 unclear=0
route: approver

PR #8422
facts: approved=False conflicts=no days_since_last_activity=3
threads: author=0 reviewer=0 external=0 none=0 unclear=0
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=3
threads: author=1 reviewer=0 external=0 none=0 unclear=0
llm: pr-conversation -> author (The latest comment asks jack-berg for release timing and future PR plans, so the author is the one who needs to जवाब/respond.)
route: author

PR #8413
facts: approved=True conflicts=no days_since_last_activity=6
threads: author=0 reviewer=0 external=0 none=2 unclear=0
llm: PRRT_kwDOCkv3g86C7dSe -> none (The only comment is the author clarifying that a test covers the change; no follow-up, question, or requested action remains in the thread.)
llm: PRRT_kwDOCkv3g86Dgb4W -> none (The author only shared an FYI and a reference link for downstream changes; there’s no explicit request for action in this thread.)
route: maintainer

PR #8408
facts: approved=False conflicts=no days_since_last_activity=11
threads: author=2 reviewer=1 external=0 none=2 unclear=0
llm: PRRT_kwDOCkv3g86CKKVv -> none (The author is just clarifying where reviewers should focus; no explicit follow-up or action is requested in the thread.)
llm: PRRT_kwDOCkv3g86CKMLE -> none (The author only clarified that the suppressed boxed-primitive comparison is intentional and not a real issue; no change or response is requested.)
llm: PRRT_kwDOCkv3g86CKN7v -> reviewer (The author is asking whether this Jackson constructor approach should be changed, so the next move is for a reviewer/maintainer to answer or weigh in.)
llm: PRRT_kwDOCkv3g86CKPJM -> author (The author notes a follow-up investigation into renaming the methods to `set*`, so the next step is on the author to explore or implement that change.)
llm: PRRT_kwDOCkv3g86CKPwd -> author (The latest comment is from the PR author saying they don’t like the `toString` and will look into changing it, so the remaining work is on the author to update the implementation.)
route: author

PR #8407
facts: approved=False conflicts=no days_since_last_activity=7
threads: author=0 reviewer=1 external=0 none=1 unclear=0
llm: PRRT_kwDOCkv3g86CMfQS -> reviewer (The reviewer asked for explanatory comments, and the author says they added them in a follow-up commit, so the thread is back in reviewer court for confirmation.)
llm: PRRT_kwDOCkv3g86CMnfF -> none (The author answered the question and explained the reflective signature change; no further action is requested in the thread.)
route: approver

PR #8377
facts: approved=False conflicts=yes days_since_last_activity=18
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 the thread is blocked on an upstream release outside this repository.)
route: external

PR #8364
facts: approved=False conflicts=no days_since_last_activity=11
threads: author=3 reviewer=0 external=0 none=0 unclear=0
llm: PRRT_kwDOCkv3g86BhQsA -> author (The approver requested concrete code changes: add a clarifying comment and adjust the test strategy to avoid unnecessary allocation. The thread is unresolved and still awaiting the PR author to update the code.)
llm: PRRT_kwDOCkv3g86BhVsZ -> author (Reviewer identified missing collision handling beyond `attributes` and asked for it to cover `resource`, `scope`, and `additionalAttributes`, so the PR author needs to update the implementation.)
llm: pr-conversation -> author (The author explicitly says they will rebase, apply the 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=2
threads: author=0 reviewer=0 external=0 none=0 unclear=0
route: approver

PR #8349
facts: approved=False conflicts=no days_since_last_activity=6
threads: author=0 reviewer=0 external=0 none=0 unclear=0
route: approver

PR #8270
facts: approved=False conflicts=yes days_since_last_activity=34
threads: author=0 reviewer=0 external=0 none=1 unclear=0
llm: PRRT_kwDOCkv3g857PtCt -> none (The reviewer and author agreed to defer this work to a follow-up PR, and the latest comment is just acknowledgment; no further action is requested in this thread.)
route: approver

PR #8261
facts: approved=True conflicts=no days_since_last_activity=47
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," which answers the question without requesting any further change.)
llm: PRRT_kwDOCkv3g855rwM4 -> author (The approver asked an open question about the change and no reply is shown in the thread, so the PR author needs to explain or adjust the code.)
route: author

PR #8256
facts: approved=False conflicts=yes days_since_last_activity=49
threads: author=0 reviewer=1 external=0 none=0 unclear=0
llm: pr-conversation -> reviewer (The author answered the reviewer’s question with evidence about the TOU dependency, so the thread is back with the reviewer to react or approve.)
route: approver

PR #8240
facts: approved=False conflicts=no days_since_last_activity=33
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 reply says they still need to investigate why the relevant benchmark metrics are zero. The requested follow-up is still on the author to complete.)
route: author

PR #8232
facts: approved=False conflicts=no days_since_last_activity=34
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 reviewer says the PR should be deferred until `graalvm/setup-graalvm` has a usable Java 26 artifact.)
route: external

PR #8197
facts: approved=False conflicts=yes days_since_last_activity=40
threads: author=0 reviewer=0 external=1 none=0 unclear=0
llm: pr-conversation -> external (The author’s latest reply points to the upstream specification issue, and jack already indicated the PR can wait as a reference until that discussion resolves, so the next step is outside this repository.)
route: external

PR #8164
facts: approved=False conflicts=no days_since_last_activity=6
threads: author=1 reviewer=0 external=0 none=0 unclear=0
llm: PRRT_kwDOCkv3g85z-n0C -> author (A reviewer requested a code change to add a guardrail/commented config name, and the latest reply only expresses approval of that convention; the implementation still appears to be on the author.)
route: author

PR #8076
facts: approved=False conflicts=yes days_since_last_activity=19
threads: author=0 reviewer=2 external=0 none=0 unclear=0
llm: PRRT_kwDOCkv3g85-kTBF -> reviewer (The reviewer left an optional optimization suggestion, and the author replied “added,” so the ball is back with the reviewer to confirm the change is sufficient or resolve the thread.)
llm: pr-conversation -> reviewer (The latest comment is the author asking how to invoke `setConfig` from an extension because `GlobalOpenTelemetry.get()` is wrapped, so the thread is waiting on reviewer guidance or a design answer.)
route: approver

PR #7763
facts: approved=False conflicts=yes days_since_last_activity=208
threads: author=0 reviewer=1 external=0 none=0 unclear=0
llm: pr-conversation -> reviewer (The reviewer asked for justification, and the author answered with their rationale. The thread now needs reviewer follow-up to decide whether that explanation is sufficient.)
route: approver

PR #7741
facts: approved=False conflicts=no days_since_last_activity=53
threads: author=1 reviewer=0 external=0 none=0 unclear=0
llm: pr-conversation -> author (The latest comment is an external suggestion asking the author to evaluate it (“Let me know what you think”), so the thread is waiting on the PR author’s response rather than a reviewer or maintainer action.)
route: author

PR #6791
facts: approved=False conflicts=yes days_since_last_activity=16
threads: author=2 reviewer=0 external=0 none=1 unclear=0
llm: PRRT_kwDOCkv3g85aSnGV -> author (The approver is asking the PR author to justify the change with a specification reference, so the author needs to respond with evidence or revise the implementation.)
llm: PRRT_kwDOCkv3g85aSnh9 -> author (The approver asked the PR author to add a test covering the change, so the next action is on the author to implement it.)
llm: pr-conversation -> none (The only comment is an FYI linking a related PR, with no request for action or reply in this thread.)
route: author

Generated 2026-05-26 15:13 UTC