mirror of
https://github.com/LearningCircuit/local-deep-research.git
synced 2026-06-15 19:46:56 +03:00
1054775ad6
* docs(processes): add review process guide and contributor lifecycle section Introduces docs/processes/<process-name>/ as the convention for documenting organizational processes, with README.md as the entry point so visiting the folder URL on GitHub renders directly. First process documented is the PR review process. docs/processes/review-process/README.md covers: - Quick-reference label table (what each triage label means + who acts next) - Maintainer roster (global codeowners + extended reviewer team) - PR triage queue: canonical search filters reviewers can run to find work that needs attention - Lifecycle of a PR (label transitions on review/synchronize) - Reviewer responsibilities per label - Spotting low-engagement PRs: concrete heuristics (broken tests, mechanical churn, ignored feedback, scope violations) and the recommended needs-rework response - Bot-PR policy: treat as proposals; close or take forward as maintainer-authored PR rather than iterating with the bot. References #3847 as the working example. - Escalation paths for security and legal concerns CONTRIBUTING.md gains a Pull Request Lifecycle subsection with the contributor-facing label table and an Engagement expectations paragraph: AI tooling is welcome, what matters is reading your diff, running tests, and answering review questions directly. Existing docs/SECURITY_REVIEW_PROCESS.md is left in place; migration to docs/processes/security-review-process/ is a separate follow-up. PR 5 of 5 introducing PR triage automation. Depends on labels being synced first via PR 1 (#3857). * docs(processes): drop killed-template references, soften engagement section PR #3860 (the structured PR template) was closed in favor of leaving PR descriptions free-form, so two stale references no longer make sense: - CONTRIBUTING.md "Engagement expectations" section pointed contributors at "the PR template's Verification section" — that section doesn't exist. Rewritten as "Showing your engagement" with the verification narrative ask delivered via the PR body directly. Tone reframed from reject-shaped to invite-shaped: needs-rework is presented as a way to focus review time, not as turning the contribution away. - docs/processes/review-process/README.md (maintainer-facing) had two similar references — "Verification section of the template" and "template-shaped description" — both rewritten to point at the PR body directly without referencing a template that doesn't exist.