chore(codeowners): describe the file as review routing, not as authorship - #346
Conversation
…ship The header claimed the handles below are the people who own the repository day to day. That is not what the list is: some entries are there because the role carries the repository rather than because the person is the most recent contributor, and describing it as authorship invites the reader to check it against the commit log and find a mismatch that was never intended. Assisted-By: Claude Signed-off-by: Andrei Kvapil <andrei.kvapil@aenix.io>
|
Caution The consumer version of Gemini Code Assist on GitHub has been sunset. All code review activity has officially ceased. |
|
No actionable comments were generated in the recent review. 🎉 ℹ️ Recent review info⚙️ Run configurationConfiguration used: defaults Review profile: CHILL Plan: Pro Plus Run ID: 📒 Files selected for processing (1)
📝 WalkthroughWalkthroughUpdates ChangesCODEOWNERS review routing
Estimated code review effort: 1 (Trivial) | ~2 minutes Possibly related PRs
Suggested reviewers: 🚥 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 |
Follow-up to #344, which merged before this wording was corrected.
The header there says the handles below are "the people who own this repository day to day". That is not what the list is, and Timofei Larkin (@lllamnyp) pointed out the mismatch: some entries are on the list because the role carries the repository, not because the person has the most recent commits. Describing a routing list as authorship invites the reader to check it against the commit log and find a discrepancy that was never intended.
Same correction is going into the seven sibling pull requests that have not merged yet.
Summary by CodeRabbit