Skip to content

Mention CI in CONTRIBUTING's validation step #70

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Merged
dmccoystephenson merged 1 commit into from
Jul 27, 2026
Merged

Mention CI in CONTRIBUTING's validation step #70

Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
1 commit
Select commit
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
9 changes: 7 additions & 2 deletions CONTRIBUTING.md
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -40,8 +40,13 @@ contributors:
capability, `fix/<short-name>` for corrections.
2. Edit `create-dev-loop.md` (and `README.md` / `RESEARCH.md` / `CLAUDE.md`
as needed — see "Project conventions" above).
3. Validate your change. There is no automated test suite; the real test is
running `/create-dev-loop` against a real repository and confirming:
3. Validate your change. CI (`.github/workflows/ci.yml`) runs automatically
on your PR and mechanically checks two of the rules above — every
`{{placeholder}}` has a substitution-table row, and README's Step list
stays 1:1 with `create-dev-loop.md` — plus local relative-link checks. It
catches doc drift, not behavior. There is no automated behavioral test
suite; the real test for behavior is running `/create-dev-loop` against a
real repository and confirming:
- the generated skill file compiles (no unresolved `{{placeholders}}`
remain)
- the slash command link resolves correctly
Expand Down
Loading