Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Use GitHub Actions for writing a stale action #29232

Closed
trivikr opened this issue Aug 20, 2019 · 12 comments
Closed

Use GitHub Actions for writing a stale action #29232

trivikr opened this issue Aug 20, 2019 · 12 comments
Labels
meta Issues and PRs related to the general management of the project.

Comments

@trivikr
Copy link
Member

trivikr commented Aug 20, 2019

Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe.
This came up in #28798 (comment) where we were planning to use stale bot

Describe the solution you'd like
Use GitHub Actions for writing a stale action (example)

Describe alternatives you've considered
Follow #28798 (comment)

@trivikr
Copy link
Member Author

trivikr commented Aug 20, 2019

Configs discussed in #28798:

  • daysUntilStale: 60
  • daysUntilClose: 365

To avoid too many stale notifications at once, use skipCreatedBefore config and update it as described in #28798 (comment)

@jasnell
Copy link
Member

jasnell commented Aug 20, 2019

Initially, I would go with a longer stale period. Let's say 90 to 120 days.

@trivikr
Copy link
Member Author

trivikr commented Aug 20, 2019

The daysUntilStale value of 60 was guessed from the comment from @bnoordhuis in #28798 (comment)

Empirically, I'd say that > 50% of issues that have been dormant for a month, stay dormant.

The idea is post stale message every daysUntilStale days, till not activity (other than stale message) happens for daysUntilClose days - when issue/PR will be closed.

We can update daysUntilStale to 90/120 if 60 is too low.

@trivikr trivikr added the meta Issues and PRs related to the general management of the project. label Aug 20, 2019
@bnoordhuis
Copy link
Member

I'm still +1 on this.

@targos
Copy link
Member

targos commented Aug 28, 2019

@trivikr I think you should go ahead and open a PR

@trivikr
Copy link
Member Author

trivikr commented Aug 28, 2019

I just got access to GitHub Actions Beta, and will experiment with it over the Labour Day weekend 😄

@trivikr
Copy link
Member Author

trivikr commented Sep 6, 2019

I couldn't play with GitHub Actions during Labour Day weekend, and friends planned another trip this weekend.
I'll keep this open for another week, if anyone else wants to experiment.

@trivikr
Copy link
Member Author

trivikr commented Sep 13, 2019

I'll be playing with GitHub actions over the weekend of 09/14

@trivikr
Copy link
Member Author

trivikr commented Sep 30, 2019

Update: GitHub stale action is pretty new, and will need some time to get stable.

For example, the support for exempt labels was added on Aug 27 in actions/stale#11
Blog post describing experience with GitHub Actions https://evilmartians.com/chronicles/github-actions-first-impressions

@trivikr
Copy link
Member Author

trivikr commented Sep 30, 2019

In Node.js core, we tried writing CI with GitHub Actions in #29193
But decided to wait till Actions goes stable in November as described in #29193 (comment)

@trivikr
Copy link
Member Author

trivikr commented Oct 1, 2019

GitHub just added a new workflow editor for Actions
Details: https://github.blog/2019-10-01-new-workflow-editor-for-github-actions/

@Trott
Copy link
Member

Trott commented Jan 28, 2022

I'm going to close this because I don't think there's support for it. But if someone thinks I'm wrong and wants to try to work something up, please re-open or leave a comment (or jump right to the open-a-pull-request option).

@Trott Trott closed this as completed Jan 28, 2022
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
meta Issues and PRs related to the general management of the project.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

5 participants