Skip to content

docs(skills): correct the held-signal definition and document the blockedBy read field - #10068

Merged
JSONbored merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
docs/gardening-label-semantics-blockedby
Jul 31, 2026
Merged

docs(skills): correct the held-signal definition and document the blockedBy read field#10068
JSONbored merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
docs/gardening-label-semantics-blockedby

Conversation

@JSONbored

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Owner

What

Two corrections to .claude/skills/contributor-pipeline-gardening/reference.md. Doc-only — no code, no tests, no generated artifacts.

1. The held-signal definition was wrong

The Labels section claimed maintainer-only + roadmap were a paired held signal that had to be added and removed together. They are not paired, and roadmap is not a held signal at all.

The real held signals are:

  1. the maintainer-only label,
  2. a JSONbored assignee,
  3. the absence of a points-bearing gittensor:* label.

Any one of them holds an issue. roadmap is orthogonal and legitimately appears on both held and contributor-open issues.

This is not theoretical: the 2026-07-31 gardening pass acted on the wrong rule and flagged #7662 — unassigned, gittensor:feature, genuinely contributor-open — as having an inconsistent label set purely because it carries roadmap without maintainer-only. Left unfixed, the next pass could have "corrected" that by adding maintainer-only, silently removing a real issue from the contributor pool.

The corrected text also states the availability filter explicitly, so the doc now matches the filter the 50-100+ floor is actually computed with.

2. Reading a dependency uses blockedBy, not blockedByIssues

reference.md already documents the addBlockedBy mutation, but nothing said how to read the relationship. blockedByIssues fails with a cryptic undefinedField error on type Issue that reads like the whole dependency feature is unavailable on this repo. The correct field is blockedBy (inverse: blocking). Added with a working query, next to the existing -F query=@file gotcha, since sweeping it is how Pass 3 finds work whose blockers have all closed.

Test Coverage

None applicable — .claude/skills/** is documentation, outside coverage.include and not executed by any suite.

…ckedBy read field

The gardening reference claimed `maintainer-only` + `roadmap` were a paired
"held" signal that had to be added and removed together. That is wrong, and a
gardening pass acted on it — flagging #7662, a correctly-labeled and genuinely
contributor-open issue, as inconsistent because it carries `roadmap` without
`maintainer-only`.

The real held signals are the `maintainer-only` label, a JSONbored assignee, and
the absence of a points-bearing `gittensor:*` label; any one of them holds an
issue. `roadmap` is orthogonal and appears on both held and open issues, so it
must never be added or stripped to change an issue's availability. This is the
same filter the 50-100+ contributor-available floor is already computed with, so
the doc now matches the measurement.

Also documents that reading a dependency uses the `blockedBy` field, not
`blockedByIssues` — the latter fails with an `undefinedField` error on `Issue`
that reads like the dependency feature is unavailable on the repo, when only the
field name differs from the already-documented `addBlockedBy` mutation.
@loopover-orb

loopover-orb Bot commented Jul 31, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Important

🟨🟨🟨🟨🟨🟨🟨🟨🟨🟨🟨🟨

⏳ LoopOver is waiting…

LoopOver has seen this pull request and is waiting on CI checks to finish before reviewing it. This comment will update once the review runs.

🟩 Safe / merged · 🟦 Advisory · 🟨 Held for review · 🟥 Blocked / closed · 🟨 Waiting

@superagent-security

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Superagent didn't find any vulnerabilities or security issues in this PR.

@JSONbored JSONbored self-assigned this Jul 31, 2026
@JSONbored
JSONbored merged commit 32e3886 into main Jul 31, 2026
6 checks passed
@JSONbored
JSONbored deleted the docs/gardening-label-semantics-blockedby branch July 31, 2026 06:15
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant