[skip-ci] Lock closed issues and PRs

[cevich]

Lock closed issues and PRs after a reasonable amount of time to prevent spamming engineers with irreverent notifications. Should the workflow fail for some reason, notify the podman-monitor mailing list.

N/B: This PR includes a commit intended to help confirm this workflow functions w/o affecting potentially thousands of issues/PRs. It's intended to be reverted by a future PR.

Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?

None

[cevich]

Testing this workflow in https://github.com/containers/automation_sandbox:

• Test run failed as expected using instrumented workflow (test failure + e-mail failure).
• Test run failed unexpectedly using actual/intended workflow

Investigating fix...

[cevich]

...fixed by adding permissions. Manually tested the fix and now the workflow now behaves as intended.

Edit: Clarify link

[cevich]

@containers/podman-maintainers PTAL, this should be ready to go. It will need to be manually merged. I tested this as best as I could (see above), but there could be hiccups. I intend to open followup PRs as needed once we see what happens.

[edsantiago]

I'm confused. In your test run (I think that's your test run?) I see 1825, but then I see that recent PRs are also tagged with the lock. I was expecting only old-old PRs to be locked. Have I misunderstood something?

[cevich]

I was expecting only old-old PRs to be locked. Have I misunderstood something?

Thanks for checking closely. I didn't look at the activity dates, since all/most of the PRs in that repo. are really really old. I'll go look and make sure they were really over 90-days old...

[edsantiago]

The ones I see are >90 days, but I was expecting 1825 because the magic clicky-expandy log that I can't link to says 1825.

[cevich]

...yeah, the most recent PR did not get the label. I think it's okay, there were no issues/PRs older than 1825 to close.

[cevich]

In case it's not clear to others, this is the test run where I changed it to 90-days. It just happened there was only one closed PR newer than 90 days.

[vrothberg]

It would be nice to drop a message explaining when an issue/PR gets locked.

Something down the lines of "Closed issues/PRs are getting locked after 90 days. Please open a new issue with the requested issue template if needed" .

Email filters can help in marking the bot message as read, so we don't get spammed by it. The reasoning for such a message is that I think most users are unaware that we prefer/need fresh issues rather than discussing on old ones. Some guidance may be required.

[Luap99]

It would be nice to drop a message explaining when an issue/PR gets locked.

Something down the lines of "Closed issues/PRs are getting locked after 90 days. Please open a new issue with the requested issue template if needed" .

Email filters can help in marking the bot message as read, so we don't get spammed by it. The reasoning for such a message is that I think most users are unaware that we prefer/need fresh issues rather than discussing on old ones. Some guidance may be required.

That is why we apply the label locked - please file new issue/PR, I really do not want to generate new messages. Otherwise this sill spams the hell out of me. I am using the build in github notifications, not email, so I cannot use such a filter.
I discussed this but you didn't answer on #19012 (reply in thread) so I assume @cevich just went ahead with this approach.

The locking and applying label part does not create a new notification. Maintainers may create filters for such messages but it will still generate noise for the other participants on the issue.

---

@cevich I think you should also update CONTRIBUTING.md to mention this behaviour.

[vrothberg]

I discussed this but you didn't answer on #19012 (reply in thread) so I assume @cevich just went ahead with this approach.

Sorry, that went through the cracks.

I am using the build in github notifications, not email, so I cannot use such a filter.

I see that. It won't work using the GitHub web UI. OK, then please ignore my comment; I missed my chance.

[cevich]

Force-push: Updated CONTRIBUTING.md as requested.

[cevich]

Force-push: Updated CONTRIBUTING.md again.

[mheon]

LGTM, very welcome change

[rhatdan]

/lgtm
/approve

[openshift-ci]

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: cevich, rhatdan

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

The pull request process is described here

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

• OWNERS [rhatdan]

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

[cevich]

Post-merge note: I manually triggered a run of this action to test it.

[cevich]

Result: The latest opened issue (#1313), closed on Aug 22, 2018 was correctly locked. Only 49 other issues were touched (limit built-in to the action itself). Then the workflow test-failed as designed, and the podman-monitor list received the test-failure notice.

[edsantiago]

Looks good. The issue list shows suitable old IDs, and all of them are closed or merged:

$ jq '.[].issue_number' < foo.js | while read i;do printf "%6d %s\n" $i "$(gh issue view $i|grep state:)";done
  1313 state:   CLOSED
  1314 state:   CLOSED
  ....

[Luap99]

Thanks!

[edsantiago]

Looks like it worked; a handful of PRs/issues are now starting to get locked.