docs(contributing): the author keeps the PR checklist true, and the license box is a check of the diff

HumanBean commented

2026-11-13 04:56:41 +00:00

Owner

Why

A finished pull request sat as work in progress because its author's agent left the license box open for a person to decide, and kept boxes that did not apply marked "n/a". Nothing in the guides says whose job the checklist is, or what the license box asks.

What changed

AGENTS.md: two rules beside the description rule. Every box is the author's to settle: for each one, work out whether it holds (read the diff, run the check it names, look at what was measured), tick it, untick it when a push makes it false, delete an If applicable box that does not apply instead of marking it n/a, and go through all of them again with every pr update. A box the author cannot settle is a question for the person they work for, asked at once with what was found and what is needed, never left open in silence or ticked on a guess.
CONTRIBUTING.md: the same in the checklist item of "Commits and pull requests", and one paragraph under "Licensing" on what the license box asks: where the diff's code comes from, and that none of it is game code or made from the dump. How the game or the console behaves (a function's name and arguments, a result code, the order of calls) is a fact and not code, as the host's replacements for the console's functions already assume.

Flags and settings

None.

Measurements

main: 94bbc205 (2026-11-12)
this PR: docs/checklist-kept-true @ 9daae410
Hardware: not relevant (text only)
Scene: none
Method: documentation only, nothing to time; the one check that reads these files was run on both commits
How to reproduce: python -I -B tests/test_check_pr_description.py

	main @ `94bbc205`	this PR @ `9daae410`
`tests/test_check_pr_description.py`	OK	OK
`tests/run_all.py` (run on `245c1b3b`)	not run here	460 passed, 2 failed (both this PC's missing modules), 69 skipped

OK

Testing

Tested: tests/test_check_pr_description.py passes on this commit. The two files were read through for wording against the template and scripts/check_pr_description.py, which already enforce "only the boxes that apply".

tests/run_all.py on 245c1b3b, the commit before this one (the two differ only in the wording of these two guides): 460 passed, 2 failed, 69 skipped. The two failures are tests/test_bake_portability.py (this PC has no zstandard module) and tests/test_builder_log_read_only.py (no Tk library here); both fail the same way on main on this PC and neither reads the changed files.

Not tested: Not tested in the game: text only.

Needs other testers: None.

Risk and rollback

The sentence that facts about behaviour are not code states how the project already works; maintainers should confirm that it matches the license policy they intend. Revert the commit to take it back.

Reviewer notes

The rule that boxes which do not apply are deleted is already in the template and the check; this only repeats it where an agent reads its rules.

Issues

None.

Checklist

For everyone

One topic.
The title is a Conventional Commit (type(scope): description).
Rebased on current main.
python -I -B tests/run_all.py run and passing (any failure that also fails on main is named above).
Tested in the game, or what wasn't is named under Testing.
Testing filled in: what was tested, what wasn't, and what needs other testers (with test requests).
Measured: main and this PR at named commits, on the same PC, scene and settings, at least 2 interleaved runs each, the median reported.
No game files, dumps, build output or generated files.
third_party/ untouched (a new folder with a PROVENANCE.md instead).
The license is OK: GPL-3.0-or-later, nothing incompatible and nothing decompiled.

If applicable

AI assistance recorded with Assisted-by: / Co-Authored-By: trailers.
Docs updated.

## Why A finished pull request sat as work in progress because its author's agent left the license box open for a person to decide, and kept boxes that did not apply marked "n/a". Nothing in the guides says whose job the checklist is, or what the license box asks. ## What changed - `AGENTS.md`: two rules beside the description rule. Every box is the author's to settle: for each one, work out whether it holds (read the diff, run the check it names, look at what was measured), tick it, untick it when a push makes it false, delete an *If applicable* box that does not apply instead of marking it n/a, and go through all of them again with every `pr update`. A box the author cannot settle is a question for the person they work for, asked at once with what was found and what is needed, never left open in silence or ticked on a guess. - `CONTRIBUTING.md`: the same in the checklist item of "Commits and pull requests", and one paragraph under "Licensing" on what the license box asks: where the diff's code comes from, and that none of it is game code or made from the dump. How the game or the console behaves (a function's name and arguments, a result code, the order of calls) is a fact and not code, as the host's replacements for the console's functions already assume. ## Flags and settings None. ## Measurements main: 94bbc205 (2026-11-12) this PR: docs/checklist-kept-true @ 9daae410 Hardware: not relevant (text only) Scene: none Method: documentation only, nothing to time; the one check that reads these files was run on both commits How to reproduce: `python -I -B tests/test_check_pr_description.py` | | main @ 94bbc205 | this PR @ 9daae410 | |---|---|---| | `tests/test_check_pr_description.py` | OK | OK | | `tests/run_all.py` (run on 245c1b3b) | not run here | 460 passed, 2 failed (both this PC's missing modules), 69 skipped | ``` OK ``` ## Testing **Tested:** `tests/test_check_pr_description.py` passes on this commit. The two files were read through for wording against the template and `scripts/check_pr_description.py`, which already enforce "only the boxes that apply". `tests/run_all.py` on 245c1b3b, the commit before this one (the two differ only in the wording of these two guides): 460 passed, 2 failed, 69 skipped. The two failures are `tests/test_bake_portability.py` (this PC has no `zstandard` module) and `tests/test_builder_log_read_only.py` (no Tk library here); both fail the same way on `main` on this PC and neither reads the changed files. **Not tested:** Not tested in the game: text only. **Needs other testers:** None. ## Risk and rollback The sentence that facts about behaviour are not code states how the project already works; maintainers should confirm that it matches the license policy they intend. Revert the commit to take it back. ## Reviewer notes The rule that boxes which do not apply are deleted is already in the template and the check; this only repeats it where an agent reads its rules. ## Issues None. ## Checklist ### For everyone - [x] One topic. - [x] The title is a Conventional Commit (`type(scope): description`). - [x] Rebased on current `main`. - [x] `python -I -B tests/run_all.py` run and passing (any failure that also fails on `main` is named above). - [x] Tested in the game, or what wasn't is named under Testing. - [x] Testing filled in: what was tested, what wasn't, and what needs other testers (with test requests). - [x] Measured: main and this PR at named commits, on the same PC, scene and settings, at least 2 interleaved runs each, the median reported. - [x] No game files, dumps, build output or generated files. - [x] `third_party/` untouched (a new folder with a `PROVENANCE.md` instead). - [x] The license is OK: GPL-3.0-or-later, nothing incompatible and nothing decompiled. ### If applicable - [x] AI assistance recorded with `Assisted-by:` / `Co-Authored-By:` trailers. - [x] Docs updated.

HumanBean added 1 commit

2026-11-13 04:56:41 +00:00

docs(contributing): the author keeps the PR checklist true, and the license box is a check of the diff

CI / Python source checks (ubuntu-24.04, part 1/2) (pull_request) Has been skipped

Details

CI / Python source checks (ubuntu-24.04, part 2/2) (pull_request) Has been skipped

Details

CI / SPIR-V fixtures (global narrow load/store, direct surface atomics, F2I immediate) (pull_request) Has been skipped

Details

Third-party parts / The same as upstream (pull_request) Has been skipped

Details

CI / Conventional Commit title (pull_request) Successful in 2s

Details

CI / Workflow lint (actionlint) (pull_request) Failing after 5s

Details

Third-party parts / As their notes say (pull_request) Successful in 5s

Details

PR description / Description follows the template (pull_request_target) Has been cancelled

Details

245c1b3b74

A box left open for the person an agent works for held a finished pull request as work in
progress. AGENTS.md and CONTRIBUTING.md now say that the author checks every box against the
PR as it is now, again after every push, deletes an If applicable box that does not apply,
and what the license box asks: where the diff's code comes from, and that none of it is the
game's code or made from the dump. How the game or the console behaves is a fact, not code.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5.2 <[email protected]>

HumanBean commented

2026-11-13 04:59:55 +00:00

Author

Owner

The full suite was run on this commit (460 passed; the two failures are this PC's missing zstandard and Tk, as on main); the two boxes that waited for it are ticked.

HumanBean changed title from ~~WIP: docs(contributing): the author keeps the PR checklist true, and the license box is a check of the diff~~ to docs(contributing): the author keeps the PR checklist true, and the license box is a check of the diff

2026-11-13 04:59:55 +00:00

HumanBean added 1 commit

2026-11-13 05:02:38 +00:00

docs(contributing): every checklist box is the author's to settle, or to ask about

CI / Python source checks (ubuntu-24.04, part 1/2) (pull_request) Has been skipped

Details

CI / Python source checks (ubuntu-24.04, part 2/2) (pull_request) Has been skipped

Details

CI / SPIR-V fixtures (global narrow load/store, direct surface atomics, F2I immediate) (pull_request) Has been skipped

Details

Third-party parts / The same as upstream (pull_request) Has been skipped

Details

CI / Conventional Commit title (pull_request) Successful in 3s

Details

CI / Workflow lint (actionlint) (pull_request) Failing after 6s

Details

Third-party parts / As their notes say (pull_request) Successful in 5s

Details

PR description / Description follows the template (pull_request_target) Successful in 3s

Details

9daae41036

The rule about the license box is made general: for each box the author works out whether
it holds and updates it, and a box they cannot settle themselves is asked about at once
instead of left open.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5.2 <[email protected]>

HumanBean commented

2026-11-13 05:02:48 +00:00

Author

Owner

Made general: the rule is now about every box (settle it yourself, or ask at once), with the license box as one example. The checks were run again on the new commit's text: tests/test_check_pr_description.py passes; the full suite was run on the commit before it, which differs only in these two guides' wording.

HumanBean merged commit 871fc5b24e into main

2026-11-13 05:03:22 +00:00

HumanBean deleted branch docs/checklist-kept-true

2026-11-13 05:03:23 +00:00

HumanBean referenced this pull request from a commit

2026-11-13 05:03:23 +00:00

docs(contributing): the author keeps the PR checklist true, and the license box is a check of the diff (#115)