Repository navigation
feat(github): add issue forms and a PR template - #1847
Conversation
CONTRIBUTING asks every change to start with an issue or a discussion, but the repository had no `.github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/` and no PR template, so a contributor who clones the repo and opens a PR meets a blank box and, later, a review comment asking them to go file the issue they did not know they needed. - `ISSUE_TEMPLATE/bug_report.yml` asks for expected, actual, a minimal repro, `openspec --version`, and the agent and model, and points users who already have OpenSpec installed at `openspec feedback`. - `ISSUE_TEMPLATE/feature_request.yml` asks for the problem, who it affects, and what was tried, and routes core-design topics to Discussions. - `ISSUE_TEMPLATE/config.yml` keeps blank issues enabled, so the pre-filled URL that `openspec feedback` prints when `gh` is unavailable still works, and links Discussions and Discord. - `PULL_REQUEST_TEMPLATE.md` puts `Closes #` on the first line with the "no issue yet?" path directly under it, catching the PR-first contributor at the moment they need it — no bot and no CI gate. Labels referenced by the forms (`bug`, `enhancement`, `needs-triage`) all exist in this repository. Part of #1834 Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
|
Navigate logical layers of code changes, visualize relationships, and explore their blast radius. No actionable comments were generated in the recent review. 🎉 ℹ️ Recent review info⚙️ Run configurationConfiguration used: Repository: Fission-AI/OpenSpec/.coderabbit.yaml Review profile: CHILL Plan: Advanced Run ID: 📒 Files selected for processing (1)
🚧 Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (1)
Included review availability: This review used your included allowance. Your plan provides up to 10 included reviews per hour; 4 remain after this review. 📝 WalkthroughWalkthroughAdded GitHub issue forms for bug reports and feature requests, contact links for discussions and Discord, and a pull request template with prompts for issue links, verification, changesets, and coding-agent contributions. ChangesContribution intake
Priority: ⬇️ Low Estimated code review effort: 2 (Simple) | ~10 minutes Change: Feature Merge Risk: ⚪ Minimal · up to The existing feedback fallback remains available. No confirmed issue blocks merging. 🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 5✅ Passed checks (5 passed)
✨ Finishing Touches🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)
Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out. Comment |
alfred-openspec
left a comment
alfred-openspec
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The issue forms and links are valid, but the PR template ends with a checklist item saying to name the coding agent and model below. There is no field or content below that line, so the instruction cannot be followed as written. Add an explicit agent/model field or point contributors to the Notes section, then re-request review.
alfred-openspec
left a comment
alfred-openspec
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Re-reviewed at 91e6573. The prior PR-template blocker is fixed, the issue forms and links are valid, and CI is green.
2 participants
Status: LGTM; ready for human review. All applicable CI checks passed on
bac383ca.Motivation
Contributors currently start with blank issue and PR descriptions. Implements step 1 of #1834.
What it does
openspec feedbackaccurately: it submits immediately or provides a manual submission link. Allows an unknown version when installation fails.Proof it works
git diff --checkpassed. Only four GitHub template files differ from the base; source, workflows, and package contents are unchanged.Notes
No changeset needed. Feedback workflow registration and CLI form-prefill changes remain separate work in #1834. GitHub's live form rendering can be checked after merge. Hardened with Codex (GPT-6); checks run locally.
Summary by CodeRabbit