Files
PaperClipAI/.github
DottaandPaperclip 561e956266 chore: assign owners to Greptile configuration and rules (#16174)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Repository rules guide code authors and reviewers.
> - PR #16172 added rules and Greptile configuration to Git.
> - Those directories need named maintainers for future changes.
> - This pull request adds ownership for both root directories.
> - The entries use the same four maintainers as the existing
infrastructure entries.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**Issue type**

Missing ownership for repository review guidance.

**Where is the issue?**

`.github/CODEOWNERS`, for the root `.greptile/` and `rules/`
directories.

**What's wrong?**

Changes to these directories do not match an explicit code owner entry.

**Suggested fix**

Assign the existing four infrastructure maintainers to both directory
trees.

Refs: #16172.

## What Changed

- Add `/.greptile/` and `/rules/` to CODEOWNERS.
- Assign `@cryppadotta`, `@devinfoley`, `@nickyleach`, and
`@forgottendev` to both entries.

## Verification

- `git diff --check`: passed.
- GitHub CODEOWNERS validation API on the published branch: zero errors.
- Confirm both entries have the same owner list as the existing
`.github/**` entry: passed.
- Check root and nested paths with Git's ignore-pattern matching: five
positive and three negative cases passed.
- Application typecheck, tests, and build were not run locally. This
changes only CODEOWNERS and does not change application behavior.
- Hosted CI and Greptile review are pending.

## Risks

Low risk. Future changes in these root directory trees will request
review from the existing maintainers. Nested directories with the same
names elsewhere in the repository do not match the new entries.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex based on GPT-6. The exact runtime model ID and
context-window size are not exposed in this session. Used reasoning,
repository inspection, official GitHub documentation, and shell
verification.

## Checklist

- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass (ownership and pattern
checks above; application suites were not run)
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable (direct checks for
this ownership-only change)
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-13 09:05:39 -05:00
..