Repository navigation
docs: clarify next tooling retirement across revisions - #1293
Conversation
Codex Review SummaryThis comment shows the latest Codex review activity on this pull request.
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHubYour team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
Codex reacts with 👀 while any review is running, comments if it has suggestions, and reacts with 👍 once all reviews finish with no findings. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: ef46bb8ceb
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub
Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
- Open a pull request for review
- Mark a draft as ready
- Comment "@codex review".
If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.
Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".
markstuart-oai
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Reviewed all three changed files at 52b2d1e9c008. The guidance preserves generated-file ownership, the unconditional ban on new budget changes, and required checks while distinguishing retired files from hosted settings. The six security-model citations now match the current policy and component sections. The three earlier findings are addressed; no actionable findings remain.
Source-only review; no local tests or builds ran. Hosted CI is still finishing.
The next contributor guidance currently says this revision retains the legacy Castiron checker and reporting workflows. Canonical regeneration removes those files, leaving that wording stale.
Describe the transition in terms of the actual checkout: preserve checks while the legacy tooling exists, retire it through regeneration, and inspect hosted workflow settings and repository rules separately. This changes only AGENTS.md and CONTRIBUTING.md; generated-file ownership and required-check protections remain intact.
This public-owned documentation prerequisite addresses the guidance concern in #1291. That generated promotion will refresh onto this baseline after merge.
Validation: reviewed both complete diffs, checked unchanged policy links and headings, and ran git diff --check. No runtime or workflow changes.