docs: open the question, support and docs-feedback routes - #195
Conversation
|
Warning Review limit reachedYou’ve reached a temporary PR review limit under our Fair Usage Limits Policy. Next review available in: 12 minutes Enable usage-based reviews in Billing to review now. Otherwise, wait until the next included review is available. How can I continue?After more reviews become available, a review can be triggered using the To avoid repeated limits, reduce automatic review volume by pausing incremental auto-reviews earlier, using label-based review opt-in, excluding WIP or generated PR titles, or requesting reviews manually when the PR is ready. If your team needs uninterrupted high-volume reviews, an organization admin can enable usage-based reviews. How do review limits work?CodeRabbit enforces per-developer PR review limits for each organization. Most developers receive the normal plan review availability. For paid Pro and Pro+ PR reviews, CodeRabbit uses adaptive limits for sustained high-volume activity. When a developer's recent PR review activity reaches the 95th percentile or higher among CodeRabbit users, additional reviews become available more gradually as earlier reviews age out of the rolling window. Please refer docs for additional details. Review details⚙️ Run configurationConfiguration used: Organization UI Review profile: ASSERTIVE Plan: Pro Run ID: 📒 Files selected for processing (3)
✨ Finishing Touches🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)
Comment |
A user who hit a wrong docs page or had a question had nowhere to go. Blank issues are disabled, Discussions was off, and config.yml's only contact link was the security advisory — so the choices were to misfile a bug or give up. The `type:question` label has existed since M0 with no surface that could ever produce it, and the PRD-specified `area:docs` label did not exist at all. Add two forms and the routing that makes them findable: - docs.yml collects the page URL and the mike version-selector entry, because the site is versioned and those are what make a report reproducible; plus what kind of problem it is and what the reader expected. The suggested correction is deliberately optional — someone who can only describe the problem should still be able to file. - question.yml is the only form producing `type:question`. Concrete answerable questions land here and are triaged with the issues; open-ended ones go to Discussions Q&A, which is now enabled. config.yml gains the non-issue exits: Discussions Q&A, the docs site, the contributing guide, and an existing-issue search. Security stays first — it is the one route where taking the wrong one causes harm. Both new forms carry their SPDX header inline, matching the three existing forms rather than relying on the REUSE.toml blanket. Verified: all six templates parse and satisfy the issue-forms schema, and all five contact links return HTTP 200 (the Discussions Q&A URL included, so it is live rather than a 404 placeholder). Refs #163
963cf58 to
fe8ef16
Compare
|
@coderabbitai review |
✅ Action performedReview finished.
|
|
@coderabbitai full review |
✅ Action performedFull review finished. You're currently rate limited under our Fair Usage Limits Policy. Your recent PR review activity is in the 95th percentile or higher among CodeRabbit users, so adaptive limits apply. Your next review will be available in 12 minutes. |
|
@codex review |
|
Codex Review: Didn't find any major issues. More of your lovely PRs please. Reviewed commit: ℹ️ About Codex in GitHubYour team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
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". |
1 participant
Summary
A user who found a wrong docs page, or simply had a question, had nowhere to go. Blank issues are disabled, Discussions was off, and
config.yml's only contact link was the security advisory — so the available choices were to misfile a bug or give up. Two labels existed with no surface that could produce them:type:questionsince M0, and the PRD-specifiedarea:docs, which did not exist at all until this work.Two new forms plus the routing that makes them findable:
docs.yml— collects the page URL and the entry from themikeversion selector, because the site is versioned and those two are what make a report reproducible; then the kind of problem (wrong / missing / unclear / broken link / stale), the §4.2 module, and what the reader expected. The suggested correction is deliberately optional: someone who can only describe the problem should still be able to file. Auto-labelstype:docs+area:docs.question.yml— the only form that producestype:question. Asks what was already tried, so the answer is not something the asker already ruled out.config.ymlgains the non-issue exits: Discussions Q&A, the docs site, the contributing guide, and an existing-issue search. Security stays first — it is the one route where taking the wrong one causes harm.Routing between the two channels
Both channels are now open, so the split is stated in both forms rather than left to guesswork: a concrete, answerable question goes to the issue form and is triaged alongside issues; an open-ended "how should I approach…?" goes to Discussions Q&A. An answered question that turns out to reveal a docs gap becomes a
type:docsissue — a question that had to be asked is itself a documentation signal.Already applied outside this PR
q-a), which is why the link ships live rather than commented out.area:docslabel was created (0e8a16, matching every otherarea:*).Linked tracking
Type of change
feat— new capabilityfix— bug fixdocs/chore/ci/build/refactor/test/perf!/BREAKING CHANGE:— a deliberate schema-version bumpSelf-review checklist (PRD §12.4)
.github/only.REUSE.toml**blanket.Testing
All six templates parsed and checked against the issue-forms schema — required keys present, every dropdown carries options, and no form is missing
name/description/body:bug.ymltype:bugfeature.ymltype:featurevalidation-oracle-failure.ymltype:validation-oracle-failure,priority:P0docs.ymltype:docs,area:docsquestion.ymltype:questionconfig.ymlEvery contact link returns HTTP 200, including
discussions/new?category=q-a— so the Q&A route is live, not a 404 placeholder.Required-field discipline follows the house pattern:
bug.ymlrequires 4 of 9 andfeature.yml3 of 8, so 5 of 8 and 4 of 6 are in range without being onerous. The three pre-submission checkboxes are copied verbatim frombug.ymlso the duplicate / security / no-real-data contract is identical across every form.Note on the labels
docs.ymlauto-applies two labels wherebug.ymlandfeature.ymlapply one. That is deliberate:area:docsis otherwise unreachable from any form, and the form's own module dropdown records which §4.2 area the page covers, which is a different axis from "this is a documentation problem".