harald/zeroclaw
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull requests Projects Releases Packages Wiki Activity Actions 3

chore(labeler): normalize module labels and backfill contributor tiers (#462)

Browse source 
Co-authored-by: Will Sarg <12886992+willsarg@users.noreply.github.com>
This commit is contained in:
Chummy 2026-02-17 21:25:50 +08:00 • committed by GitHub
parent df31359ec4
commit a35d1e37c8
No known key found for this signature in database
GPG key ID: B5690EEEBB952194
7 changed files with 351 additions and 14 deletions
Download patch file Download diff file Expand all files Collapse all files

2
docs/ci-map.md
View file

@ -27,7 +27,7 @@ Merge-blocking checks should stay small and deterministic. Optional checks are u
### Optional Repository Automation
- `.github/workflows/labeler.yml` (`PR Labeler`)
- Purpose: scope/path labels + size/risk labels + fine-grained module labels (`<module>:<component>`)
- Purpose: scope/path labels + size/risk labels + fine-grained module labels (`<module>: <component>`)
- Additional behavior: label descriptions are auto-managed as hover tooltips to explain each auto-judgment rule
- Additional behavior: provider-related keywords in provider/config/onboard/integration changes are promoted to `provider:*` labels (for example `provider:kimi`, `provider:deepseek`)
- Additional behavior: hierarchical de-duplication keeps only the most specific scope labels (for example `tool:composio` suppresses `tool:core` and `tool`)

2
docs/pr-workflow.md
View file

@ -244,7 +244,7 @@ Label discipline:
- Path labels identify subsystem ownership quickly.
- Size labels drive batching strategy.
- Risk labels drive review depth (`risk: low/medium/high`).
- Module labels (`<module>:<component>`) improve reviewer routing for integration-specific changes and future newly-added modules.
- Module labels (`<module>: <component>`) improve reviewer routing for integration-specific changes and future newly-added modules.
- `risk: manual` allows maintainers to preserve a human risk judgment when automation lacks context.
- `no-stale` is reserved for accepted-but-blocked work.

2
docs/reviewer-playbook.md
View file

@ -14,7 +14,7 @@ Use it to reduce review latency without reducing quality.
For every new PR, do a fast intake pass:
1. Confirm template completeness (`summary`, `validation`, `security`, `rollback`).
2. Confirm labels (`size:*`, `risk:*`, scope labels such as `provider`/`channel`/`security`, module-scoped labels such as `channel:*`/`provider:*`/`tool:*`, and contributor tier labels when applicable) are present and plausible.
2. Confirm labels (`size:*`, `risk:*`, scope labels such as `provider`/`channel`/`security`, module-scoped labels such as `channel: *`/`provider: *`/`tool: *`, and contributor tier labels when applicable) are present and plausible.
3. Confirm CI signal status (`CI Required Gate`).
4. Confirm scope is one concern (reject mixed mega-PRs unless justified).
5. Confirm privacy/data-hygiene and neutral test wording requirements are satisfied.