Skip to content

Latest commit

 

History

History
213 lines (176 loc) · 34.3 KB

File metadata and controls

213 lines (176 loc) · 34.3 KB

TanStack Table open-PR closure audit

Generated 2026-07-30 from a fresh scan of all 126 open pull requests in TanStack/table.

Result

  • 117 PRs can close now: all 107 targeting main (v8), both targeting v7, and all 8 targeting the superseded v9 alpha branch.
  • 9 PRs should remain open: all target the current v9 beta branch.
  • 2 current-beta PRs have merge conflicts: #6313 and #6443.
  • 1 additional beta PR has a failing required check: #6361 is mergeable, but @tanstack/table-core:test:types fails.
  • No PRs, issues, labels, reviews, or comments were changed as part of this audit.

Audit baseline

  • Current/default branch: beta at 79cbfb6722246baab6fa070966363700aca92298 (v9.0.0-beta.62)
  • v8 branch: main at d08af367e11c539bb7e18c2472aa761149ef6db6 (v8.21.3)
  • Superseded v9 branch: alpha at 4f855fe4ed088c1d5d5149a3649518587b426d6c (v9.0.0-alpha.54)
  • Legacy branch: v7 at 06703a56890122cedf1b2fa4b82982999537774e (v7.8.0)
  • Evidence checked: PR bodies, diffs, changed files, discussions/reviews, linked issue state, replacement PRs, current beta source, GitHub mergeability, draft state, and check rollups.
  • Branch rule: close work based on main, v7, or alpha; retain work based on the current beta branch.
  • Conflict rule: only GitHub's current mergeable: false / mergeable_state: dirty result is called a merge conflict. A failing or incomplete check is reported separately.

Summary

Category Count Recommended action
Resolved or Superseded in V9 41 Close; the behavior, docs, or architecture is already present or replaced in beta.
Revisit with a Fresh V9 PR 19 Close the stale PR, retain the issue/idea, and implement anew from beta if pursued.
Non-consequential to Port 38 Close; do not spend v9 migration effort on the stale docs/example/type cleanup.
Wrong Direction for the Library 16 Close with the current API/design boundary or supported alternative.
Too Conflict-heavy to Rescue 3 Close; conflict resolution would effectively be a rewrite.
Keep Open — Beta Clean 4 Keep; current beta target, clean merge state, and passing checks.
Keep Open — Beta Needs Attention 3 Keep; resolve CI, incomplete checks, or an outstanding design decision.
Keep Open — Beta Merge Conflicts 2 Keep, but rebase and resolve conflicts before further review.
Total 126 117 close candidates; 9 keep open.

Suggested response language

Use the response for the PR's category and add the PR-specific evidence from its audit line.

Resolved or Superseded in V9

Thanks for the contribution. We are closing PRs against the pre-beta code lines as we consolidate development on v9 beta. This change is already covered by the current beta implementation or by a replacement PR, so there is nothing useful to port from this branch. We appreciate the work and report that helped identify it.

Revisit with a Fresh V9 PR

Thanks for working on this. The underlying issue/idea is legitimate, but this PR targets an obsolete code line and the current v9 architecture has moved too far for the patch to be carried forward safely. We are closing this PR while retaining the linked issue or audit note. If we pursue it, it should be a fresh PR from beta with a focused current-v9 regression test.

Non-consequential to Port

Thanks for the cleanup. We are closing stale PRs targeting pre-beta branches. Since this is limited to docs, examples, types, or minor cleanup in an area that has since moved, we are not going to spend migration effort porting it. A fresh current-branch PR is welcome if the same problem is still visible and consequential.

Wrong Direction for the Library

Thanks for exploring this. After reviewing it against the current v9 API and design boundaries, we do not want to take the library in this direction. We are closing the PR rather than porting it. The rationale or supported alternative is noted below.

Too Conflict-heavy to Rescue

Thanks for the substantial work here. This branch has diverged enough from the current v9 beta that resolving the conflicts would amount to rewriting the change, and the old diff is no longer a safe review unit. We are closing this PR. If the need still exists, please start with a narrowly scoped proposal or fresh PR from beta.

Close now

Resolved or Superseded in V9 (41)

Revisit with a Fresh V9 PR (19)

Non-consequential to Port (38)

Wrong Direction for the Library (16)

Too Conflict-heavy to Rescue (3)

Keep open

Beta Clean (4)

Beta Needs Attention (3)

Beta Merge Conflicts (2)