[PR #2229] [MERGED] docs: define contribution scope and simplify proposal forms #5097

New issue

Closed

opened 2026-10-31 01:03:54 +00:00 by bsakaguchi · 0 comments

bsakaguchi commented

2026-10-31 01:03:54 +00:00

Owner

📋 Pull Request Information

Original PR: https://github.com/morluto/rea/pull/2229
Author: @N0zoM1z0
Created: 10/12/2026
Status: ✅ Merged
Merged: 10/12/2026
Merged by: @N0zoM1z0

Base: main ← Head: docs/contribution-scope-20261012

📝 Commits (2)

583c4bd docs: define contribution scope and fail-closed integration
a82530c docs: make contribution forms easier to complete

📊 Changes

6 files changed (+248 additions, -27 deletions)

View changed files

📝 .github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/config.yml (+3 -0)
📝 .github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/design_discussion.yml (+55 -13)
📝 .github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/feature_request.yml (+64 -11)
📝 .github/pull_request_template.md (+29 -3)
📝 AGENTS.md (+2 -0)
📝 CONTRIBUTING.md (+95 -0)

📄 Description

Summary

REA's contribution guidelines do not currently define which protection-bypass or attack workflows belong outside the project. Document that boundary and give contributors structured choices for describing target interactions and verification, with explicit unknowns allowed at proposal time.

Change and scope

Centralize supported, individually reviewed, and excluded capabilities in CONTRIBUTING.md; reference the rule from AGENTS.md, the issue picker, and proposal/PR templates.
Fail closed on material scope, authority, side-effect, and required verification questions: do not merge, enable, or officially distribute unresolved capabilities. Passing CI and form selections do not establish scope approval.
Give feature requests and design discussions two required text areas, target-interaction multi-selects, and verification-readiness dropdowns with explicit Not sure yet choices. Additional technical details and samples are optional at proposal time.
Welcome small exploratory prototypes and draft PRs that help settle open questions. Keep the final maintainer decision and verification gate before integration; preserve unknowns instead of treating unselected effects as absent.

This is a contribution and maintainer-review policy. It does not add runtime target operations or an automated authorization system. General static analysis and reviewed runtime investigation remain eligible; excluded research is not declared unlawful merely because it is outside REA's scope. No related issue is required for this documentation and template update.

Validation performed

Strict YAML parsing of all four issue forms and the picker configuration; checked field structure, unique identifiers/options, required acknowledgements, and policy links.
Checked minimum idea-only, partially known, and documentation-only submissions against the configured requirements. Each proposal form has two required text areas; scope/readiness dropdowns have no preselected claim.
Verified the supported/excluded scope and fail-closed gate remain intact after simplifying the forms, and all six reviewed files are byte-identical after rebasing onto current main.
Staged formatting checks and local Markdown link/anchor checks passed.
npm run docs:check passed all six tasks, including generated metadata, documentation facts, and schema freshness.
The pre-push npm run check:fast gate passed typechecking, lint, and module-boundary checks.

Local verification was restricted to two CPU cores with an 8 GiB family memory guard; the documentation check peaked at about 2.6 GiB and the pre-push gate at about 3.5 GiB. Git authors and committers use GitHub noreply addresses.

_{🔄 This issue represents a GitHub Pull Request. It cannot be merged through Gitea due to API limitations.}

## 📋 Pull Request Information **Original PR:** https://github.com/morluto/rea/pull/2229 **Author:** [@N0zoM1z0](https://github.com/N0zoM1z0) **Created:** 10/12/2026 **Status:** ✅ Merged **Merged:** 10/12/2026 **Merged by:** [@N0zoM1z0](https://github.com/N0zoM1z0) **Base:** `main` ← **Head:** `docs/contribution-scope-20261012` --- ### 📝 Commits (2) - [`583c4bd`](https://github.com/morluto/rea/commit/583c4bdb74686db2d2c582eaec9ef64e6ede4318) docs: define contribution scope and fail-closed integration - [`a82530c`](https://github.com/morluto/rea/commit/a82530cc59d10967ae20983ed211546feaa5b263) docs: make contribution forms easier to complete ### 📊 Changes **6 files changed** (+248 additions, -27 deletions) <details> <summary>View changed files</summary> 📝 `.github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/config.yml` (+3 -0) 📝 `.github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/design_discussion.yml` (+55 -13) 📝 `.github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/feature_request.yml` (+64 -11) 📝 `.github/pull_request_template.md` (+29 -3) 📝 `AGENTS.md` (+2 -0) 📝 `CONTRIBUTING.md` (+95 -0) </details> ### 📄 Description ## Summary REA's contribution guidelines do not currently define which protection-bypass or attack workflows belong outside the project. Document that boundary and give contributors structured choices for describing target interactions and verification, with explicit unknowns allowed at proposal time. ## Change and scope - Centralize supported, individually reviewed, and excluded capabilities in `CONTRIBUTING.md`; reference the rule from `AGENTS.md`, the issue picker, and proposal/PR templates. - Fail closed on material scope, authority, side-effect, and required verification questions: do not merge, enable, or officially distribute unresolved capabilities. Passing CI and form selections do not establish scope approval. - Give feature requests and design discussions two required text areas, target-interaction multi-selects, and verification-readiness dropdowns with explicit **Not sure yet** choices. Additional technical details and samples are optional at proposal time. - Welcome small exploratory prototypes and draft PRs that help settle open questions. Keep the final maintainer decision and verification gate before integration; preserve unknowns instead of treating unselected effects as absent. This is a contribution and maintainer-review policy. It does not add runtime target operations or an automated authorization system. General static analysis and reviewed runtime investigation remain eligible; excluded research is not declared unlawful merely because it is outside REA's scope. No related issue is required for this documentation and template update. ## Validation performed - Strict YAML parsing of all four issue forms and the picker configuration; checked field structure, unique identifiers/options, required acknowledgements, and policy links. - Checked minimum idea-only, partially known, and documentation-only submissions against the configured requirements. Each proposal form has two required text areas; scope/readiness dropdowns have no preselected claim. - Verified the supported/excluded scope and fail-closed gate remain intact after simplifying the forms, and all six reviewed files are byte-identical after rebasing onto current main. - Staged formatting checks and local Markdown link/anchor checks passed. - `npm run docs:check` passed all six tasks, including generated metadata, documentation facts, and schema freshness. - The pre-push `npm run check:fast` gate passed typechecking, lint, and module-boundary checks. Local verification was restricted to two CPU cores with an 8 GiB family memory guard; the documentation check peaked at about 2.6 GiB and the pre-push gate at about 3.5 GiB. Git authors and committers use GitHub noreply addresses. --- <sub>🔄 This issue represents a GitHub Pull Request. It cannot be merged through Gitea due to API limitations.</sub>

bsakaguchi

2026-10-31 01:03:54 +00:00

closed this issue
added the
pull-request
label

bsakaguchi referenced this issue

2026-11-01 21:43:08 +00:00

[PR #5175] [CLOSED] fix(frida): count lone high surrogates in JSON byte budgets #6801

No milestone

No project

No assignees

1 participant

Notifications

Due date

The due date is invalid or out of range. Please use the format "yyyy-mm-dd".

No due date set.

Dependencies

No dependencies set.

Reference

morluto/rea#5097

No description provided.

Rows
Columns