Should new prefix issue workflow logic consider one or more issues?

[bgyori]

Currently (as well as before the changes in #1258), the code turning new prefix issues into PRs iterates over multiple issues and thereby considers multiple prefixes simultaneously for addition. An example of this is #1266 where both #1257 and #1265 were processed and added to a PR.

Should this logic be preserved, or alternatively, should we look at the payload in this section
https://github.com/biopragmatics/bioregistry/blob/main/.github/workflows/new_prefix_pr.yml#L24-L26
to figure out what specific new issue triggered the workflow, and just create a PR from that given issue, not other past issues?

[nagutm]

Based on the last line of this comment: #1193 (review), I have been creating individual PRs for every new curation in order to limit the scope and not create too much cross communication between unrelated resources where information can easily get lost.

If we want to continue this then it probably makes more sense to limit the workflow to not iterate over every open issue. Especially considering that we often make edits and suggestions to the content of a new entry before merging it.