chore: register a.springut and a.pyanzin as skill owners - #31
chore: register a.springut and a.pyanzin as skill owners#31JavadManashti wants to merge 1 commit into
Conversation
The VALID_OWNERS allowlist added in #28 landed after #24 and #29 were already open, so both fail validation on a legitimate new owner rather than a typo. Registering both unblocks them without asking either author to edit a validator they don't otherwise touch. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Pull request overview
Registers two additional internal owner IDs in the skill validator allowlist so existing skill PRs using these metadata.owner values can pass CI.
Changes:
- Added
a.springutto theVALID_OWNERSallowlist. - Added
a.pyanzinto theVALID_OWNERSallowlist.
💡 Add a code-review agent skill or configure MCP servers for context-aware, tailored reviews. Learn more in the docs.
|
@y-klochikhin @e-chernykh — two-line review if either of you has a minute, and it unblocks two other PRs. Both #24 and #29 currently fail CI on a single error each, and neither is the author's fault: The Worth flagging honestly: this is the second time in a week that allowlist has cost more than it caught. Its only job is catching a typo in If you'd rather, downgrading the unknown-owner case from error to warning is a one-line change and I'll do that instead — the typo still gets surfaced, it just doesn't block. Say which you prefer and I'll adjust before merge. |
Two-line follow-up to #28.
The
VALID_OWNERSallowlist merged in #28 (added at Copilot's suggestion — the PR description had claimed validation the code didn't do). It landed after #24 and #29 were opened, so both now fail CI on:Neither is a typo — both are real owners of skills currently in review (@aspringut-xsolla, @apyanzin-xsolla). Registering them here rather than asking each author to patch a validator file unrelated to their change.
Validator is clean on this branch:
0 new errors, 0 known debt, 0 warnings.Note on the tradeoff
Worth a maintainer's opinion: as written, every new skill author's first PR fails CI until someone adds them here. That's real friction for a check whose only job is catching a typo. It's defensible — a bad
ownersilently breaks review routing, which is the exact bug class #28 fixed in CODEOWNERS — but if the friction outweighs it, downgrading the unknown-owner case from error to warning is a one-line change and I'm happy to do that instead.