chore: add CODEOWNERS so the ruleset's code-owner review has something to match - #61
Merged
Conversation
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Pull request overview
Adds a repository-owned .github/CODEOWNERS file so the existing branch protection ruleset option require_code_owner_review: true has an actual match target and therefore becomes enforceable when additional maintainers exist.
Changes:
- Add
.github/CODEOWNERSwith a catch-all (*) mapping to a single owner (@tschm). - Document CODEOWNERS matching/precedence behavior and the single-maintainer limitation directly in the file comments.
💡 Add a code-review agent skill or configure MCP servers for context-aware, tailored reviews. Learn more in the docs.
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Adds
.github/CODEOWNERSwith a single catch-all owner.Why
The
main-branch-protectionruleset (applied to this repo today, id 20598569) setsrequire_code_owner_review: true. With noCODEOWNERSfile anywhere in the repo, that rule matched nothing and was silently inert — it looked like a protection and enforced nothing. This gives it something to match.What it does and doesn't change
Placement
.github/CODEOWNERSis not in.rhiza/template.lock, unlike the 23 other.github/files rhiza manages (workflows, issue templates, the ruleset JSONs). So this is repo-owned and the next/rhiza:updatewill not overwrite it.The comment block in the file records the last-match-wins ordering rule, so narrower entries added later go below the catch-all rather than above it.