Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
feat(inventory): rfcs is on the board — record the two workflows it now has - #138
Merged
Conversation
…ow has Paired with tracebloc/rfcs' board-visibility PR, which adds add-to-kanban.yml (byte-identical copy, blob 45aa70a) and a set-pr-status caller so RFC PRs get a card and land in `Code review`. Seven RFCs are open, none merged, none with a human review. They stalled because the board is how this team works and they were not on it -- rfcs had no .github/workflows directory at all. Also corrected every remaining exemption reason in this block. All nine said "rfcs was created 2026-08-01 and has no .github/workflows directory yet", which this change makes false. The seven still-absent callers are now recorded as STRUCTURAL rather than pending: rfcs publishes no artifact, has no deploy stages and is main-only by decision, so there is no hop for advance-deploy-env, fr-gate, fr-pass-comment or kanban-closure-router to act on. Written down as a decision, not carried as a debt that nobody intends to pay. MERGE ORDER: the rfcs PR first, then this. The audit compares live caller state against the checked-out inventory, so marking these `required` before the files exist reports them MISSING -- correctly. Note two of the four findings currently reported by this branch belong to .github#136 (model-zoo / start-training code-quality exemptions), which is also open and must land first. Three .github PRs now touch the same invariant. Refs #1405, #1415
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Cursor Bugbot has reviewed your changes and found 1 potential issue.
❌ Bugbot Autofix is OFF. To automatically fix reported issues with cloud agents, enable autofix in the Cursor dashboard.
Reviewed by Cursor Bugbot for commit 469a845. Configure here.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Bugbot on .github#138, and it is right. My first version asserted the same "no deploy hop to act on" reason for all nine callers. That is only true for some, and it silently overwrote reasons that were already accurate. Corrected, using the existing shared anchors where they apply: code-quality -> *code_quality_caller_missing (a REAL gap: gitleaks and house-rules would do work on markdown) kanban-closure-router -> *kanban_closure_router_caller_missing (a REAL gap: it acts on close events, which this repo has now that add-to-kanban creates cards) customer-priority-bump -> *customer_priority_bump_caller_missing public-pii-gate -> *private_repo_no_public_exposure wip-limit-check -> *wip_limit_check_has_no_callers fr-gate -> *no_staging_branch_no_hop_to_gate Only three keep a bespoke structural reason, and each says why it is distinct: advance-deploy-env (no `develop`, so no dev stage to advance into), fr-pass-comment (no `staging`, so the column it drains is unreachable -- which is what separates it from the repos that HAVE the stage and lack the valve), and the stale-backlog copy (an untouched RFC is a decision nobody took, not a stale backlog item). The general lesson, which is why Bugbot's catch matters more than the diff: an exemption whose stated reason does not describe the caller is worse than no exemption. It reads as decided when it is unexamined, and #1415's whole premise is that the reason is the finding. Selftest 42/42. Refs #1405, #1415
saadqbal
approved these changes
Aug 4, 2026
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for freeto join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
3 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Puts RFC PRs on the engineer kanban, in
Code review.Why
Seven RFCs are open, none merged, none with a single human review. They stalled for a structural reason, not a lack of will:
rfcshad no.github/workflowsdirectory at all, so its PRs never got a card — and the board is how this team decides what to look at. A decision document nobody sees is not a decision under review; it is a file.add-to-kanban.ymlcreates the card,set-pr-status.ymlmoves a non-draft PR toCode review— which is the right column for an RFC. An RFC in review is review work, and that is the column the team reads.Paired with the rfcs PR
tracebloc/rfcsgets two files:add-to-kanban.yml— a byte-identical copy of this repo's, blob45aa70ac. Verified identical, because the inventory compares copies by blob sha and a drifted copy is a finding.set-pr-status.yml— the standard caller,@main.Merge the rfcs PR first, then this one. The audit compares live caller state against the checked-out inventory, so marking these
requiredbefore the files exist reports themMISSING— correctly.Every exemption reason in this block was false, and is now fixed
All nine read "rfcs was created 2026-08-01 and has no
.github/workflowsdirectory yet." This change makes that untrue.The seven callers that stay absent are now recorded as structural rather than pending:
rfcspublishes no artifact, has no deploy stages, and ismain-only by decision, so there is no hop foradvance-deploy-env,fr-gate,fr-pass-commentorkanban-closure-routerto act on. That is a decision written down, not a debt nobody intends to pay — which is the distinction #1415's schema exists to force.Note on the audit while this is open
This branch currently reports four findings. Two are the expected rfcs pair above. The other two belong to
.github#136(model-zoo/start-trainingcode-quality exemptions), which is also open and must land first.Three
.githubPRs now touch the same invariant, which is worth naming: this is the fourth time today a cross-repo caller change has produced an unavoidable red window. The guard cannot express "coordinated change in flight", so every such change is red between its two merges. Four occurrences in one day is no longer a coincidence — it is an argument that the coupling itself deserves a fix, and I would rather record that than keep absorbing it silently.caller-drift-selftest.py: 42 pass, 0 fail.Note
Low Risk
YAML-only inventory and exemption documentation; no runtime code, though it must land after the rfcs workflow files exist to avoid expected drift findings.
Overview
Aligns the
rfcsinventory block with the pairedtracebloc/rfcsworkflow PR so RFC PRs are expected on the engineer kanban viaadd-to-kanban.yml(copy,required) andset-pr-status.yml(caller,required).The previous nine identical "no
.github/workflowsyet" exemptions are removed. Remaining absent callers now use accurate, per-workflow reasons—shared anchors where appropriate (code-quality,fr-gate,public-pii-gate, etc.) and custom text for deploy/train mismatches (advance-deploy-env,fr-pass-comment). A short comment documents why blanket copy-paste reasons were wrong (Bugbot /.github#138).stale-backlog.ymlstays exempt but with a new rationale: RFCs are decision docs, not a backlog the stale sweep should auto-close.Reviewed by Cursor Bugbot for commit f1fbd23. Bugbot is set up for automated code reviews on this repo. Configure here.