# Contributing How change lands in this repo. The short version: PRs are born as drafts, three reviewer bots take the first rounds, a human takes the last word — and labels tell you where everything is without opening anything. ## The PR loop 1. **Fork and branch.** Contributors work from forks; upstream branches are for maintainers. Title the PR conventionally (`feat:`, `fix:`, `docs:`). 2. **Open as a draft** while you build. Drafts are invisible to the reviewer bots on purpose. 3. **When it's ready**: mark ready-for-review and request all three bots — `claude-bot-andresmgsl`, `codex-bot-andresmgsl`, `grok-bot-andresmgsl`. They poll roughly every 15 minutes. 4. **Rounds are answered whole.** Wait until all three have reviewed, then answer the entire round in a **single reply**, push the fixes, and re-request the bots that didn't approve. Prefer verification over argument: a test settles what a comment thread can't. 5. **Reviews end in a verdict.** A reviewer — bot or human — either **approves** or **requests changes**, never a bare comment. A comment-only review is a non-verdict: it doesn't say whether the round passed, and the state machine (and anyone scanning the board) has to guess. The verdict carries *blockingness only*, the body carries the feedback: non-blocking nits ride an **approval** and the author addresses them at their discretion; anything blocking — including a question that gates the verdict — is **request changes**, saying what unblocks it. The reconciler treats a comment-only review as not-approved, so commenting without a verdict only stalls the PR. The machine never reads review bodies: when a comment-only reviewer's line is really an agreement, that judgment belongs to the **author** — escalate by requesting the maintainer's review (step 6), and the reconciler flips the label on that request, because an explicit request is a fact it can trust. 6. **When the round passes, the author hands the PR to the maintainer** in three acts, in this order: post the tagged round summary, request the maintainer's review, then set `state:needs-human` yourself — removing the state label it replaces. The review request is what *earns* the label, provided the PR carries **no `blocker:*` label**. A blocker means the work is still yours whatever the round said, so on a conflicted or red PR neither the request nor your own label write will stick — the sweep takes it straight back off. With three formal head-current approvals the labels workflow requests the maintainer automatically; when part of the panel is comment-only, reading their agreement is the author's judgment, so the author makes the request. Writing the label by hand is an **optimistic write, not a transfer of ownership**. The machine stays the authority — but because the workflow wakes on `labeled`, the author's own write fires the sweep that validates it, and a handoff that had not earned the label is corrected seconds later. Forgetting the write is not a failure either; it only means the label waits for the cron, which is the lag this replaced. 7. **Checks must be green**: `npm run check`, `npm run build`, and `npm test` locally mirror what CI runs. 8. **Feature PRs land their changelog entry as part of the PR** (box's convention): add it under `CHANGELOG.md`'s `## Unreleased` heading — that section becomes the release notes verbatim when a release is cut. ## Releasing A release is a PR, and merging it IS the release ([#111](https://github.com/heavy-duty/cast/issues/111); box#96's design, on box#83's shape): 1. A small PR — `release: X.Y.Z`, labeled `release` — bumps `package.json`'s `version` (and `package-lock.json`; `npm install --package-lock-only` keeps them in step) and stamps `CHANGELOG.md`'s Unreleased section as `## X.Y.Z — YYYY-MM-DD`. **Then re-arm: add a fresh, empty `## Unreleased` immediately above the section you just stamped.** The same PR, the same diff — stamping without re-arming leaves main with no `## Unreleased`, and the next PR that was authored before the release and merged after has its entry land *inside the shipped section*, which git does cleanly, with no conflict to warn anyone (heavy-duty/rig#66 — it happened there). `test/release.test.ts` keys this to the version, and checks both halves of the stamp: - while `package.json` is bare, the top section may be the stamp or the re-armed `## Unreleased`, but a `## X.Y.Z` section for the version you are shipping **must exist and extract non-empty** — a bump without a stamp is red here rather than after the merge, in release.yml; - the moment step 3's `-dev` bump lands, the top section must be `## Unreleased` or CI is red. The empty `## Unreleased` this step adds is deliberately tolerated: what must extract non-empty is the section that SHIPS, not the top one. CI green on it, same loop as any PR. 2. **Merge. That's the ship decision — nothing else to do.** [release.yml](.github/workflows/release.yml) fires on the merged, `release`-labeled PR and asserts, in order, each fail-loud and creating nothing: the merged version is non-`-dev`; the version *changed in this PR* (the `-dev` transition is the interlock — a mislabeled ordinary PR fails here); that version's changelog section extracts non-empty ([.github/scripts/release-notes.sh](.github/scripts/release-notes.sh)); and no tag or release exists for it yet. Then, in the same job, it tags the merge commit bare `X.Y.Z` (no `v` prefix — box's tag scheme), builds the package once (`npm ci && npm run build && npm prune --omit=dev`), and publishes the release with the runnable tree — `bin/`, `dist/`, production `node_modules/`, `package.json` — attached as `cast-X.Y.Z.tgz`. That asset is what the installer's release channels download: the build happens once, in CI, never on an operator's machine. *Manual fallback and backfill:* push a bare `X.Y.Z` tag on the merge commit yourself — the same workflow runs the same asserts, build, and publish from the tag. 3. **The release re-arms main itself**: the same workflow run bumps `package.json` (and `package-lock.json`) to `X.Y.(Z+1)-dev` and pushes the commit straight to main — no follow-up PR (it opens one only if branch protection refuses the direct push, and says so loudly). Installs are versioned by the tree's `package.json` version, so a `CAST_REF=main` install between releases must land as `versions/X.Y.(Z+1)-dev`, never as `versions/X.Y.Z` — main's tree must not impersonate the release it merely descends from. On the *manual* tag path the bump stays yours: open the one-line PR after publishing. This step re-arms the **version** only — the `## Unreleased` heading is step 1's, in the ceremony PR's own diff, because no workflow ever writes `CHANGELOG.md`. The two halves meet in `test/release.test.ts`: once this bump makes the version `-dev`, a missing `## Unreleased` is CI-red. ## Labels — who sets what The full taxonomy lives in [LABELS.md](LABELS.md). What matters day to day is who sets each kind — most of it is machinery, and hand-moving a machine-owned label just gets corrected on the next pass: | Labels | Set by | |---|---| | `state:*` | the labels workflow ([.github/workflows/labels.yml](.github/workflows/labels.yml)) — recomputed from GitHub's own facts on PR events (label changes included) and every 15 minutes. Machine-owned, with one exception: the author sets `state:needs-human` at handoff (step 6) and the workflow reconciles it. Otherwise never by hand. Exactly one per PR: *whose ball is it.* | | `blocker:*` | the same workflow, from the same facts — *what is in the way.* Any number per PR, or none. Never by hand: applying one does not stop a merge, and removing one does not unblock anything. Fix the thing and the next sweep drops the label. | | `stale` | the same workflow — 48h without commits, comments, or reviews. `blocked` PRs are exempt: they are quiet legitimately. | | `scope:*` on PRs | actions/labeler, from the changed paths ([.github/labeler.yml](.github/labeler.yml)). Additive — you may add more, the machine won't remove them. | | `scope:*` on issues | you, when opening or triaging — issues have no paths to derive from. | | `blocked`, `release` | you — automation never guesses intent. | | `merge-next` | you or the agent owning the queue. Which PR lands first is a judgement about how they conflict, so the workflow never sets it — it only **clears** it, the moment the PR stops being something a human could merge. | | `bug` / `enhancement` / `documentation` | you, on issues only — a PR's type already lives in its title. | ## Issues Give issues the same care as PR titles: say the surface in the title, apply a `scope:` label and a type label (`bug` / `enhancement` / `documentation`) when you open one, and `blocked` when it waits on something — that is what keeps the board navigable as the issue count grows.