Repository navigation
[BUG] github-actions incorrectly closed a bunch of issues for "60 days of inactivity" #16497
Description
Activity
@catherinewu looks like github-bot also ignored you on #3039 :(
Reacted by marcindulak and Jason D'AmourHopefully @ashwin-ant can comment on this behavior.
Updated my original comment so the discussion is more clear: There was some recent activity around this 5e3e940, maybe the removal of autoclose was failing before this revert?
Actually, on the examples I pointed out the
autocloselabel was correctly removed, but the issue was still autoclosed :(Reacted by lukens, Vladimir Nicolici, Sensei and marcindulakI see, let's also tag @dhollman, who comitted the "60 days of inactivity" workflow #6369, and @bcherny and @km-anthropic, who reviewed it.
Interestingly, the above PR, was at least party "Generated with [Claude Code]", and its description contains this comment "Closes issues that have been inactive for 60 days (where last comment was the warning)". This requirement could be treated by the machine that human activities are not taken into account for "60 days of inactivity", or misimplemented.
Reacted by Vladimir Nicolici, savchenko, Paul Berg and Elijas DapšauskasIn the meantime you can upvote all discussions listed in https://github.com/orgs/community/discussions/182939. If the author of the issue could reopen it, the damage by autoclose bots would be smaller (similar damage is being/was made to other repos, e.g. Azure/AKS#3474).
Reacted by lukens, Alexander Motyka, Jesse Alama and Glenn WillenI’ve had this happen to so many issues. Very frustrating.
@marcindulak - thank you for linking me to this issue.
Reacted by Adam SpiersThank you @marcindulak for bringing this to my attention, and to @ANogin for initially reporting it.
Even when functioning properly, auto-close bots are harmful to community contributions:
- Auto-closing without proper resolution is disrespectful to the original reporter and anyone else who contributed to the report.
- It just sweeps the issue under the carpet, blindly hoping that it will magically fix itself. (The fact that this can sometimes happen doesn't justify doing it in all the other cases.)
- When issues or feature requests are marked as closed without resolution, then people are more likely to miss them, resulting in duplicate reports and consequently fragmented information.
- People searching for ways to contribute are much more likely to miss closed issues too.
- Long-standing issues are less likely to get resolved. Here's an example of a success story when issues can remain open for a long time.
See also this post.
I do understand it is annoying and perhaps even stressful to have open issues going nowhere. One solution for this is to label short-lived and long-lived issues differently to distinguish them. Another is assigning issues to different milestones. This makes it clear to users which issues are likely to be fixed sooner rather than later. Proper triage processes are valuable, but simply closing issues is not the solution. Personally I have found this highly demotivating, and will reconsider whether it's worth contributing feedback (for free, as a paying customer) to Claude Code in future, given that it generally just gets ignored.
Reacted by fsc-eriker, Chris Nighswonger, Saeed Esmaili, Ru Chern Chong, Art Shendrik, marcindulak, Ben Saufley and AlexisReacted by Igor Wojda and Art Shendrikthis is very annoying, please fix this. Your Claudes are taking over, Anthropic
Reacted by Art Shendrik@marcindulak - I've noticed issues are now also being locked due to having no activity since being closed, despite you having commented on them since they were closed (to link to this issue).
For example: #7760 (comment)
Reacted by marcindulak and Ben SaufleyI think one would need to comment repeatedly every week to prevent the "has not had any activity for 7 days" bot from locking the issue.
Let me check this assumption by commenting on #8528 (comment)
I think one would need to comment repeatedly every week to prevent the "has not had any activity for 7 days" bot from locking the issue.
Let me check this assumption by commenting on #8528 (comment)
There is an interesting outcome of this experiment:
- Issue with a fresh comment - not locked [FEATURE] Instead of annoying user with random how is claude doing survey add a command to rate and share current session #8528 (comment)
- Issue without a fresh comment - claimed to be bo locked, but not locked [Feature Request] Add automatic cost reporting on session exit #9675 (comment)
- Issue without a fresh comment - locked Inconsistent Session Limit Error Messaging in Claude Code Web #11009 (comment)
I won't be opening any issue about this locking failure (
Failed to lock issue #9675: Requires authentication) problem yet.
Reacted by rosmur and Yulong Lin25 remaining items
My accessibility issue (#13074) was one of the ones incorrectly closed by this bot. I had responded to the 30-day warning confirming the issue was still active, included a detailed root cause analysis showing the problem requires changes within Claude Code itself, and the bot closed it anyway. It's now locked so I can't reopen it.
This is especially frustrating for accessibility-related issues. Blind and screen reader users already face higher barriers to reporting bugs—the process of writing detailed reproduction steps, testing workarounds, and documenting root causes takes significant effort. Having that work silently discarded by an automated process, with no human ever acknowledging it, is demoralizing.
I'm a paying Claude Code user. I would rather have my issue sit open and unresolved than have it closed and locked with no path to follow up.
Reacted by Alexis, marcindulak, Matt Rixman, S-Luiten, Paul Berg, Arno Gobbin, Dan, phschmi and Tyler C Laprade, CFAAuto-closing issues causes duplicate issues to be created, so you then you lose the ability to count how many 👍's an issue has to determine how many people it affects. Instead you have to track down all of its duplicates and sum them.
Auto-locking issues prevents users from being able to leave comments that help each other. Unless some very specific kind of abuse is being prevented by locking issues, it should almost never be done.
I would suggest that Anthropic reconfigure these bots to apply/remove labels instead.
Reacted by Haydon Ryan, Diana Islas Ocampo, Paul Berg, Dahgoth, Leo Borai, Arno Gobbin, Adam Spiers, phschmi and Tyler C Laprade, CFAHoneslty I'm done - just had the issue I care about closed and blocked from reopening. Between this, treatment of openclaw, opencode; I cancelled my plan. This time for good.
I'm ok if something is closed a reasonable amount but forcing people to nag update comments is just antagonistic to customers.
Reacted by Saeed Esmaili, Alexis, Tom, Dahgoth, Arno Gobbin, S-Luiten and Paul Berg- Yes, this exactly! It feels like they’re just creating more work for themselves. From: Matt Rixman ***@***.***> Sent: Saturday, February 14, 2026 3:19 PM To: anthropics/claude-code ***@***.***> Cc: cmwalton ***@***.***>; Comment ***@***.***> Subject: Re: [anthropics/claude-code] [BUG] github-actions incorrectly closed a bunch of issues for "60 days of inactivity" (Issue #16497) MatrixManAtYrService left a comment (anthropics/claude-code#16497) <#16497 (comment)> Auto-closing issues causes duplicate issues to be created, so you then you lose the ability to count how many 👍's an issue has to determine how many people it affects. Instead you have to track down all of its duplicates and sum them. Auto-locking issues prevents users from being able to leave comments that help each other. Unless some very specific kind of abuse is being prevented by locking issues, it should almost never be done. I would suggest that Anthropic reconfigure these bots to apply/remove labels instead. — Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#16497 (comment)> , or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/BXGH35CTFSJVDJGEQSHLSH34L6GN7AVCNFSM6AAAAACQ3QVG22VHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHMZTSMBSGU2DCMRWGM> . You are receiving this because you commented.Message ID: ***@***.***>
#19267 (comment) notes that this is now exacerbated by another bot which aggressively adds
stalelabels.What I'd really like understand is, how has this issue not gotten any attention? Seems like there's been a lot of work towards finding ways to ignore the users. Has there been any corresponding work to identify high-profile problems and doing something about them?
For a company whose product is based on the idea that agents can handle it... Where is the agent for handling it? Like, I keep hearing about this culture where everybody is waking up to see all of this useful work that their agents have done while they sleep. But having something like this languish for over a month feels like a strong indicator that that work isn't actually as useful as the humans in charge think it is.
I take a more pessimistic view on the purpose of this repo. I don’t actually think they have anyone managing the issues and PR’s, AI or human, at all. This is just a repository to let us know when they’ve pushed a new release. So we’re diligently creating issues and PR’s and nothing ever comes of them. Just my two cents…
Reacted by Saeed Esmaili, Alexander Motyka and Antony WoodsReacted by Tyler C Laprade, CFAI don’t actually think they have anyone managing the issues and PR’s,
It's looking more and more like it, but as a matter of fact, I did receive attention from what appeared to be an employee to one of my tickets in the past.
Reacted by Steve Nims- added a commit that references this issue
on Feb 17, 2026 - added a commit that references this issue
on Feb 17, 2026 Well, maybe I spoke too soon? Heh 🤣
Reacted by Glenn Willen, Alistair Smith, DylanBruzenak, Alexander Motyka and DahgothReacted by Glenn Willen, DylanBruzenak and Jeremiah SneeThis issue has been automatically locked since it was closed and has not had any activity for 7 days. If you're experiencing a similar issue, please file a new issue and reference this one if it's relevant.
- locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators
on Feb 25, 2026
Preflight Checklist
What's Wrong?
A bunch of my bugs reports got closed today for "60 days of inactivity", despite me responding "this is still relevant" to the "30 days of inactivity" message. E.g. #3006, #3030, #7742, #7743,
What Should Happen?
Do not close and/or allow to reopen.
Error Messages/Logs
Steps to Reproduce
No clue.
Claude Model
None
Is this a regression?
Yes, this worked in a previous version
Last Working Version
No response
Claude Code Version
N/A
Platform
Anthropic API
Operating System
macOS
Terminal/Shell
Terminal.app (macOS)
Additional Information
No response