Skip to content

OWNERSHIP.md

Latest commit

 

History

History
69 lines (54 loc) · 3.22 KB

OWNERSHIP.md

File metadata and controls

69 lines (54 loc) · 3.22 KB
Raw

Ownership and review

This file describes responsibility without inventing file owners or GitHub teams. CCB does not currently publish a CODEOWNERS file. Add one only after real maintainers and teams explicitly accept durable path ownership.

Authority and responsibility

  • Repository source and tests own runtime behaviour.
  • Schemas, LuaLS declarations, registrations, and generated inventories own JSON/Lua/API contracts.
  • CI, CMake, Makefile, Gradle, and validators own build behaviour.
  • AGENTS.md, CONTRIBUTING.md, and GOVERNANCE.md own contribution policy.
  • CCB-Docs owns tutorials, explanations, architecture prose, and navigation, but never overrides a repository contract.

Every PR names a Responsible human. That role is accountability for the specific change, not permanent subsystem ownership.

Review roles

Role Responsibility
Responsible human Understands final diff, owns tests/provenance, answers review
Subsystem reviewer Checks domain correctness, compatibility, and focused tests
Documentation reviewer Checks source linkage, bilingual parity, metadata, and navigation
Release/security maintainer Reviews privileged workflows, credentials, advisories, and releases

Confirmed Responsible-human reviewer

No reviewer is recorded here merely from commit activity or repository access. CCB uses one named Responsible human for each PR. The maintainer has decided that one active, review-capable human is sufficient for the current project. The Ruleset therefore must not require a non-author or last-push approval: those gates would prevent the sole reviewer from merging a self-authored maintenance PR.

GitHub login Permission verified Willingness confirmed Confirmed at Scope
@LYHGLYTX 2026-08-02 yes 2026-08-02 All repository changes, including self-authored changes

The latest read-only permission audit was performed on 2026-08-02 (Asia/Shanghai). Issue #563 originally tracked a two-reviewer prerequisite. The explicit maintainer decision at 2026-08-02T19:24:37+08:00 replaces it with the single Responsible-human model above. This records accountability, not a fabricated GitHub approval.

Quarterly permission review

At least once per quarter, a human maintainer must:

  1. verify that every listed reviewer is a human, active, and still has review permission;
  2. reconfirm willingness and the review scope, recording the evidence and audit date without publishing private organization data;
  3. remove or replace stale entries and check the rotation/escalation path;
  4. verify that automation cannot replace the named Responsible human or claim a GitHub approval it did not receive; and
  5. update ai/repository-settings.target.yml only after the GitHub setting is observed, never in anticipation of an administrator action.

Changing ownership records

An ownership update must cite the maintainer or team, permission check, explicit agreement, scope, effective date, and replacement/rotation plan. Remove stale entries after a quarterly permissions audit. Bots and AI systems cannot be the Responsible human or approve their own changes.