Skip to content

fix(standardize-repo): add label_provisioning row to start-of-run question table (#1826) #1849

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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Merged
evanharmon1 merged 4 commits into from
Nov 5, 2026
+5 −4
Merged

fix(standardize-repo): add label_provisioning row to start-of-run question table (#1826) #1849

Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
4 commits
Select commit Hold shift + click to select a range
a164760
fix(standardize-repo): add label provisioning question
evanharmon1 Nov 4, 2026
0935fa0
Merge branch 'main' into docs/1826-label-provisioning-question-table
evanharmon1 Nov 4, 2026
a413208
Merge branch 'main' into docs/1826-label-provisioning-question-table
evanharmon1 Nov 4, 2026
d7b2fa9
Merge branch 'main' into docs/1826-label-provisioning-question-table
evanharmon1 Nov 4, 2026
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
9 changes: 5 additions & 4 deletions ai/skills/repo/standardize-repo/SKILL.md
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -73,10 +73,11 @@ existing v1 decisions file; per-repository answers have repository scope.
| 3 | Per-repo Copier answer changes? | Carry recorded answers forward; present the release's new questions/defaults for each repo | `copier_answers` (repository scope) | Repeated answer collection and confirmation in lanes |
| 4 | Which agent-apply reconcile classes may run? | None (`[]`); probes still run | `reconcile_classes` | Repeated requests for configuration-write approval |
| 5 | Disposition of open skills-sync PRs for the whole run? | `merge-first`; alternative `absorb` | `skills_sync` | Each lane asking whether its sync PR goes first or is superseded |
| 6 | Accept legacy baselines? | No (`false`) | `legacy_baseline` | Repeated legacy-baseline acceptance questions |
| 7 | Approve guarded rollback? | No (`false`) | `guarded_rollback` | Repeated rollback permission questions |
| 8 | Model rulings for lanes? | No overrides (`{}`); use resolved execution policy | `model_rulings` | Per-lane model-choice questions |
| 9 | Additional review exclusions? | None (`[]`); existing review invariants still apply | `review_exclusions` | Per-lane exclusion requests |
| 6 | Approve parent-owned creation of missing labels before draft PRs for this release? | `withheld` | `label_provisioning` | Pre-draft stop for additive label provisioning approval |
Comment thread
coderabbitai[bot] marked this conversation as resolved.
Resolved
| 7 | Accept legacy baselines? | No (`false`) | `legacy_baseline` | Repeated legacy-baseline acceptance questions |
| 8 | Approve guarded rollback? | No (`false`) | `guarded_rollback` | Repeated rollback permission questions |
| 9 | Model rulings for lanes? | No overrides (`{}`); use resolved execution policy | `model_rulings` | Per-lane model-choice questions |
| 10 | Additional review exclusions? | None (`[]`); existing review invariants still apply | `review_exclusions` | Per-lane exclusion requests |

A negative approval is a ruling to withhold that action, not a missing answer.
No answer permits merging, credential writes, self-confirmation, bypassing a
Expand Down
Loading