Ancient PR messages are applied to close out PRs. Right now the same message that's applied to issues is applied to PRs.

Should issues be locked if they get closed by the ancient logic?

When you request an issue from the GitHub API, the labels array contains the current label names, but when you request an issue's timeline, the timeline entries are the names of the labels as they were when the labels were applied. This means that labels that got renamed will show up as different names in the issue timeline.

This breaks the bot at

This line will return issues since the ancient date, not before.

Want to have an explicit label for exempt cases like no-auto-closure, but I don't want to auto close feature-requests too for example.

🐞 Bug 🐞

README does not indicate available fields for workflow configuration. Additionally doesnt include general information on how to deploy a workflow (a link should be fine)

This label should be applied when the bot closes an issue due to staleness.

Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe.

stale-issue-cleanup doesn't post comment while closing stale issues

Example issue aws/aws-sdk-js#3299

This is not a good customer experience, as stale action needs to post another message while closing the issue with the reason for closing.

Describe the solution you'd like
Stale action posts a message while closing the issue with a reason for closing.

The reason currently posted while closing-soon label:
This issue has not received a response in 1 week. If you still think there is a problem, please leave a comment to avoid the issue from automatically closing.

The reason which could be posted after closing:
This issue has been automatically closed since there has not been any response.

[I've not used the action, but this came up in conversation and I was encouraged to share the thought]

Stale botting issues/PRs seems to be a potential for unhappiness. It can often come across as harsh to the opener of the issue/PR.

I've seen stalebots where you can opt an issue/PR out of the staling; but my thought is that issues should need to be opted in to be stale botted. The project owner would be responsible for the first review of an issue/PR, and they would decide to add a label of 'canstale' to allow the stablebot to show up.

They would be triaging it the issue as "not critical", and possibly also identifying the next step. It's akin to making it "Pending Community - Close in 90 days".