fix: stop CODEOWNERS edits from requesting every owner

.github/codeowners/areas.yaml

@@ -552,45 +552,18 @@ shared:
   owners:
   - ops
   - runtime
-# CODEOWNERS is a generated artifact, so co-ownership here is about who may
-# approve it, not who reviews its contents. Every area is listed because under
-# "any one approves" any single team satisfies the gate: without this, adding a
-# file in an uncovered location needs an areas.yaml edit (ops) AND the
-# regenerated CODEOWNERS (process), two approvals to land one file. The
-# artifact cannot drift from the reviewed source -- emit_codeowners.py is a
-# pure function of areas.yaml, and the workflow's regenerate-and-diff step
-# fails on any hand-edit -- so widening approval here costs no safety.
-- glob: CODEOWNERS
-  owners:
-  - process
-  - agents
-  - backend-sglang
-  - backend-trtllm
-  - backend-vllm
-  - diffusion
-  - docs
-  - epp
-  - fault-tolerance
-  - frontend
-  - gms
-  - kv-memory
-  - multimodal
-  - observability
-  - operator
-  - ops
-  - performance
-  - planner
-  - rl
-  - router
-  - runtime
-  - tokenspeed
-  - xpu
-# areas.yaml is the routing decision itself, not a generated artifact, so it
-# does not get the wide list above: nothing stops a rule here from re-routing
-# review authority away from a team, and the strict gate only proves coverage,
-# not that the owner is the right one. Ops and process both hold repo-wide
-# process authority, and under "any one approves" either can unblock a routing
-# change without a third team having to weigh in on paths it does not own.
+# CODEOWNERS stays on the process area alone. GitHub requests every team on
+# the matching line, even when one approval satisfies the gate, so listing
+# every area here pages every codeowner group for a generated-file edit.
+# areas.yaml is already shared by ops and process, so one process review
+# still covers the source and the artifact.
+# areas.yaml is the routing decision itself, not a generated artifact.
+# Nothing stops a rule here from re-routing review authority away from a
+# team, and the strict gate only proves coverage, not that the owner is the
+# right one. Ops and process both hold repo-wide process authority, but a
+# routing change also regenerates CODEOWNERS, which process owns alone, so a
+# process approval is required. No third team has to weigh in on paths it
+# does not own.
 - glob: .github/codeowners/areas.yaml
   owners:
   - ops

.github/codeowners/test_codeowners.py

@@ -1134,6 +1134,16 @@ def test_script_in_policy_dir_is_policy(self) -> None:
     def test_codeowners_output_is_policy(self) -> None:
         assert is_policy_change(["CODEOWNERS"], self._AREAS, ".") is True
 
+    def test_codeowners_file_requests_only_process(self) -> None:
+        # GitHub requests every owner on the last matching line. A wide list
+        # on CODEOWNERS pages every codeowner group when the generated file
+        # changes, which is what happened on pull request 15170.
+        root = Path(__file__).resolve().parents[2]
+        rules = parse_codeowners((root / "CODEOWNERS").read_text())
+        assert resolve_owners(rules, "CODEOWNERS") == [
+            "@ai-dynamo/dynamo-process-codeowners"
+        ]
+
     def test_unrelated_change_is_not_policy(self) -> None:
         assert (
             is_policy_change(["src/foo.py", "owned/b.txt"], self._AREAS, ".") is False

CODEOWNERS

@@ -575,7 +575,6 @@ requirements.txt
 /.codex/                                                                                                @ai-dynamo/dynamo-process-codeowners @ai-dynamo/dynamo-agents-codeowners
 /agents/                                                                                                @ai-dynamo/dynamo-process-codeowners @ai-dynamo/dynamo-agents-codeowners
 /.agents/                                                                                               @ai-dynamo/dynamo-process-codeowners @ai-dynamo/dynamo-agents-codeowners
-/CODEOWNERS                                                                                             @ai-dynamo/dynamo-process-codeowners @ai-dynamo/dynamo-agents-codeowners @ai-dynamo/dynamo-backend-sglang-codeowners @ai-dynamo/dynamo-backend-trtllm-codeowners @ai-dynamo/dynamo-backend-vllm-codeowners @ai-dynamo/dynamo-diffusion-codeowners @ai-dynamo/dynamo-docs-codeowners @ai-dynamo/dynamo-epp-codeowners @ai-dynamo/dynamo-fault-tolerance-codeowners @ai-dynamo/dynamo-frontend-codeowners @ai-dynamo/dynamo-gms-codeowners @ai-dynamo/dynamo-kv-memory-codeowners @ai-dynamo/dynamo-multimodal-codeowners @ai-dynamo/dynamo-observability-codeowners @ai-dynamo/dynamo-operator-codeowners @ai-dynamo/dynamo-ops-codeowners @ai-dynamo/dynamo-performance-codeowners @ai-dynamo/dynamo-planner-codeowners @ai-dynamo/dynamo-rl-codeowners @ai-dynamo/dynamo-router-codeowners @ai-dynamo/dynamo-runtime-codeowners @ai-dynamo/dynamo-tokenspeed-codeowners @ai-dynamo/dynamo-xpu-codeowners
 /agent-docs/                                                                                            @ai-dynamo/dynamo-process-codeowners @ai-dynamo/dynamo-agents-codeowners
 /.lycheeignore                                                                                          @ai-dynamo/dynamo-ops-codeowners @ai-dynamo/dynamo-docs-codeowners
 /tests/deploy/                                                                                          @ai-dynamo/dynamo-ops-codeowners @ai-dynamo/dynamo-operator-codeowners