chore: add the governance issue forms

[stephane-segning]

Summary

Add the org's canonical issue-form kit (Epic / User Story / Dev Ticket + config) to this repo, since it currently has no issue templates at all — anyone filing an issue here gets a blank form with no title prefix, no label, and no issue type.

Intent

Source of truth: the 2026-08-13 cross-repo backlog consolidation (a 3-agent effort auditing which repos have no issue templates, no type:/label taxonomy wired, or drifted from the canonical kit). This repo — a fork of ClickHouse/code-interpreter where issues were only recently enabled on the ADORSYS-GIS fork — was one of five live repos found with zero issue templates.

Scope

In scope:

• Add .github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/{epic,user-story,dev-ticket,config}.yml, copied verbatim from ADORSYS-GIS/ai-governance's distributable templates/.github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/ directory (byte-identical to that repo's own .github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/, diffed to confirm).
• Add one type: line to each form (Epic / Story / Task respectively) to set GitHub's native issue type at creation time, on top of what the kit ships today.

Out of scope:

• No change to any application/interpreter source code.
• No change to labels — epic / user-story / ticket already exist in this repo (verified via gh label list; note user-story currently has an empty description here, likely from the parallel label-creation effort — flagging for that effort to reconcile, not fixing in this PR since it's out of scope for issue templates).
• No attempt to sync with upstream/ClickHouse/code-interpreter — this is fork-local governance tooling.

Verification

• git diff --stat against main before commit showed only the four new files under .github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/ — nothing else touched.
• Diffed ai-governance's templates/.github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/ against its own .github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/ (diff -rq) — byte-identical, confirming either source is canonical.
• Confirmed via gh api repos/ADORSYS-GIS/code-interpreter/contents/.github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE (404 before this PR) that no templates existed previously.
• Confirmed title/labels on each form match the required contract: epic.yml → [Epic]: / ["epic"]; user-story.yml → [Story]: / ["user-story"]; dev-ticket.yml → [Ticket]: / ["ticket"].
• config.yml verified: blank_issues_enabled: false plus the three governance contact links, unmodified from source.

Screenshots/Evidence

N/A — this is a pure .github/ config addition; there is no rendered UI to capture ahead of merge. GitHub's "Preview" for issue forms can be checked live on the branch at https://github.com/ADORSYS-GIS/code-interpreter/issues/new/choose?ref=chore/add-issue-templates if the reviewer wants to see it rendered.

Risk Assessment

Low risk, config-only. This is a downstream fork; the change is scoped entirely to .github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/* and does not touch any code path shared with ClickHouse/code-interpreter, so it will not conflict with future upstream syncs of application code. No CI, build, or runtime behavior is affected.

AI Usage Declaration

• Drafting the ticket/PR body
• Generating code (copying + minimally modifying YAML from the canonical source)
• Refactoring
• Generating tests (N/A — no test surface for issue-form YAML)
• Reviewing the diff
• Writing documentation

AI (Claude, via gh/git CLI) performed the clone, copy, type: edit, commit, push, and PR authoring end to end, under direct human instruction specifying source repo, target files, and required modifications. Human (maintainer) reviews this PR before merge.

Reviewer Focus

• Confirm the type: addition doesn't conflict with this org's GitHub issue-type configuration (native issue types must be enabled org-wide/repo-wide for the field to take effect; if not enabled, GitHub silently ignores it and only the label applies — worth a quick check).
• The user-story label on this repo currently has no description (color matches #0e8a16 but description is blank) — likely worth a follow-up gh label edit by whoever is managing labels in parallel; not touched here since it's out of this PR's scope.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) noreply@anthropic.com

---

Source of truth: ADORSYS-GIS/ai-helm#1002 — the tracking epic for the 2026-08-13 cross-repo backlog consolidation this change came out of.

[lightbridge-assistant]

🅵 Fast automated pass — SAST + a quick, diff-scoped look (no repo-wide retrieval). For a deeper, repo-aware review, mention @lightbridge-assistant on this PR.

All four files reviewed. config.yml is valid and complete (blank_issues_enabled plus three well-formed https contact_links, no issues). The three form templates are schema-conformant GitHub issue forms with correctly-placed required validations; SAST found nothing; no code/security/secret/dependency concerns. Only finding is the P2 note that the type: issue-type values (Epic/Story/Task) require those custom issue types to be configured in the org, else the type is silently ignored.

---

🤖 AI-generated review — treat it as untrusted, verify before acting; a human owns the final decision (AI governance).

[lightbridge-assistant]

type field needs org issue types

The type: Task / type: Epic / type: Story front-matter values only take effect if the organization has those custom issue types created (GitHub's default types are task, bug, feature; Epic/Story are not defaults). If the org hasn't configured Epic/Story, the type is silently ignored or the template errors. Worth confirming these types exist in org settings before merging (applies to all three templates).

Evidence: Front matter type: Task in dev-ticket.yml (also type: Epic in epic.yml:7, type: Story in user-story.yml:7); GitHub docs: default issue types are task, bug, feature — custom types like Epic/Story must be configured by an org admin.

Was this useful? React 👍/👎 to give us feedback

[stephane-segning]

Review

Verdict: findings below

Verified

• Diff scope: exactly 4 new files under .github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/ (config.yml, dev-ticket.yml, epic.yml, user-story.yml), all new file mode 100644. Nothing else touched.
• All 4 files parse as valid YAML.
• Top-level keys are all in the allowed set (name, description, title, labels, type, body on the forms; blank_issues_enabled, contact_links on config.yml). type: is top-level, not nested under body:.
• type: values: epic.yml → Epic, user-story.yml → Story, dev-ticket.yml → Task — all three exist and are isEnabled: true on the ADORSYS-GIS org (verified via GraphQL issueTypes).
• Titles/labels: [Epic]: / epic, [Story]: / user-story, [Ticket]: / ticket — matches spec. All three labels (epic, user-story, ticket) exist in this repo with a colour and a non-empty description (gh label list).
• config.yml: blank_issues_enabled: false + the three governance contact links (AI Governance source of truth, AI Working Agreement, The Doctrine).
• Content is byte-identical (md5) to the same files in the other three PRs — this is a straight copy, no repo-specific drift.
• CI: all 5 real checks pass (API Unit Tests, Deployment Config Tests, Lambda MicroVM Provisioning, Lambda MicroVM Runner Image, Service Unit Tests). "Lightbridge Review" shows skipping.

Findings

• Fork + upstream sync risk. This repo (ADORSYS-GIS/code-interpreter) is a fork of ClickHouse/code-interpreter. The PR correctly targets the fork's own main (isCrossRepository: false, base main), not upstream — good. But adding a .github/ directory that doesn't exist upstream means every future git fetch upstream && git merge (or however this fork stays in sync) will need to preserve this directory; if upstream ever adds its own .github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/, a sync merge will conflict on these exact filenames. Worth a one-line note in the fork's sync process (if one exists) that .github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/ is fork-local and should be kept on merge.
• blank_issues_enabled: false on a fork. With blank issues disabled, these three governance forms become the only way to file an issue here. For a ClickHouse fork that may still receive casual issues/questions from people expecting upstream's normal issue flow, forcing every issue through Epic/Story/Ticket forms (with the AI Usage Declaration etc.) is a judgement call worth the maintainer's explicit sign-off, not just inherited silently from the kit.
• Known-bug propagation. dev-ticket.yml and user-story.yml both carry verification-evidence as validations: required: true — this is the open kit bug ADORSYS-GIS/ai-governance#15: it forces pasting verification evidence for work that, by definition, doesn't exist yet at ticket-filing time. This PR imports that defect as-is (consistent with the other 3 PRs, but still a real defect landing in a fresh repo).

CI

• All real build/test jobs pass; this PR cannot plausibly affect them (scope is .github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/ only). No failures to explain.

---

Automated review of an AI-authored PR from the 2026-08-13 backlog consolidation (ADORSYS-GIS/ai-helm#1002). This is a self-review — it verifies mechanics, not whether the underlying decision was right. A human still owns that call.