Document efficient repository cloning

[jamesmontemagno]

Summary

• recommend a blobless, single-branch clone for contributors who need main history
• document a shallow, single-branch option for CI and read-only use
• explain the history tradeoff of the shallow option

This helps users avoid downloading disconnected generated dashboard branch history without changing repository behavior or expanding the focused Actions change in #1089.

Validation

• npx --yes markdownlint-cli2 CONTRIBUTING.md

[Copilot]

Copilot review overview

🟡 Changes recommended

Once you've addressed the issues Copilot identified, you can request another Copilot review.

Review tier: Lite
Findings: 1

New issues introduced by this change (1)

Severity	Finding
	CONTRIBUTING.md — This section says the clone retains the main branch history, but the command clones whatever the…

What changed in this PR

Adds contributor-facing guidance to reduce clone size/transfer by avoiding generated dashboard branch history, and clarifies the tradeoff between full-history vs shallow clones.

Changes:

• Document a blobless, single-branch clone approach intended for contributors who need main history.
• Document a shallow, single-branch clone option intended for CI or read-only scenarios.
• Explain that shallow clones omit older main history.

File	Description
CONTRIBUTING.md	Adds a “Cloning efficiently” section describing recommended clone options and their history/size tradeoffs.

Suppressed comments (1)

CONTRIBUTING.md:27

• This section references the latest main snapshot, but the command clones whichever branch is the repository default. Consider specifying --branch main explicitly so CI/read-only guidance stays correct if the default branch changes.

git clone --depth=1 --single-branch https://github.com/dotnet/skills.git

---

💡 Add a code-review agent skill or configure MCP servers for context-aware, tailored reviews. Learn more in the docs.

[github-actions]

👋 @jamesmontemagno — this PR has 1 unresolved review thread(s). When you're ready, please address the feedback and push an update; the triage bot will pick up the next state automatically. (Add the no-stale label to silence further pings.)

[AbhitejJohn]

I'm wondering if we'd want to move these dashboard branches off to another repo. I've been considering moving some of the test code over to another repo as well given how harnesses pull down the repo to load skills from plugins today.
/cc: @JanKrivanek for thoughts as well.

[Copilot]

Copilot review overview

🔵 Needs a closer look

Review tier: Lite
Findings: 1

Pre-existing issues (1)

Severity	Finding
	CONTRIBUTING.md — This section says the clone retains the main branch history, but the command clones whatever the… View comment

Suppressed comments (2)

Previously missed (1) — in code that hasn't changed since the last review.

CONTRIBUTING.md:22

• --filter=blob:none still downloads the blobs needed for the initial checkout; it primarily avoids downloading historical blobs until they’re needed. The current wording can read as if no file contents are downloaded during the clone.

`--single-branch` excludes the disconnected generated branches, while
`--filter=blob:none` downloads file contents on demand.

CONTRIBUTING.md:18

• The text says this clone retains the main branch history, but the command relies on whatever the repository’s default branch is. Making the branch explicit avoids confusion (and keeps this consistent with the shallow clone example below).

git clone --filter=blob:none --single-branch https://github.com/dotnet/skills.git

[Copilot]

Copilot review overview

🟢 Approval recommended

Review tier: Lite
Findings: None

Issues resolved since last review (1)

Severity	Finding
	CONTRIBUTING.md — This section says the clone retains the main branch history, but the command clones whatever the… View resolved comment

[jamesmontemagno]

@AbhitejJohn The review feedback is now fully addressed in commit df2fb6f7a69f32344381930f362fe507bd5167ad: both clone examples explicitly select main, and the blobless-clone wording now clarifies that the initial checkout still downloads required files. markdownlint-cli2 CONTRIBUTING.md passes.

I confirmed my account has triage/pull access but not push access to dotnet/skills. A maintainer can promote the updated branch with:

git fetch https://github.com/jamesmontemagno/skills.git motz-bookish-system
git push origin FETCH_HEAD:refs/heads/motz-bookish-system

GitHub cannot change an existing PR's head repository, so after the upstream branch exists we should open a replacement PR from dotnet:motz-bookish-system, then close this fork PR. I am leaving this open until the replacement exists.

[github-actions]

✅ Evaluation passed for df2fb6f. cc @webreidi @AbhitejJohn — please review.

[JanKrivanek]

I'm wondering if we'd want to move these dashboard branches off to another repo. I've been considering moving some of the test code over to another repo as well given how harnesses pull down the repo to load skills from plugins today. /cc: @JanKrivanek for thoughts as well.

Btw. moving data to different repo will mean that action will need to have write token for that other repo. Though - not a new thing - as we already moved out the session logs.

Would we move out the tests as well - then data can again live on a branch and above would not be a concerns. The contribution experience would suffer a bit + gating might get cumbersome.

All that being said - moving just the data branches might be best as of now