docs: make the repository legible to open-source readers, and license it - #97
Conversation
|
Warning Review limit reached
Next review available in: 40 minutes Enable usage-based reviews in Billing to review now. Otherwise, wait until the next included review is available. How can I continue?After more reviews become available, a review can be triggered using the To avoid repeated limits, reduce automatic review volume by pausing incremental auto-reviews earlier, using label-based review opt-in, excluding WIP or generated PR titles, or requesting reviews manually when the PR is ready. If your team needs uninterrupted high-volume reviews, an organization admin can enable usage-based reviews. How do review limits work?CodeRabbit enforces per-developer PR review limits for each organization. Most developers receive the normal plan review availability. For paid Pro and Pro+ PR reviews, CodeRabbit uses adaptive limits for sustained high-volume activity. When a developer's recent PR review activity reaches the 95th percentile or higher among CodeRabbit users, additional reviews become available more gradually as earlier reviews age out of the rolling window. Please refer docs for additional details. Review details⚙️ Run configurationConfiguration used: defaults Review profile: CHILL Plan: Pro Plus Run ID: ⛔ Files ignored due to path filters (3)
📒 Files selected for processing (15)
📝 WalkthroughWalkthroughThe pull request adds contribution and licensing files, rewrites the English README, adds a Simplified Chinese README, introduces a capability-status ledger, and declares Apache 2.0 metadata in ChangesProject documentation baseline
Estimated code review effort: 3 (Moderate) | ~20 minutes Possibly related PRs
🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 5✅ Passed checks (5 passed)
✨ Finishing Touches🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)
Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out. Comment |
![chatgpt-codex-connector[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/1144995?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: 8d01cfe98f
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub
Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
- Open a pull request for review
- Mark a draft as ready
- Comment "@codex review".
If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.
Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 4
🤖 Prompt for all review comments with AI agents
Verify each finding against current code. Fix only still-valid issues, skip the
rest with a brief reason, keep changes minimal, and validate.
Inline comments:
In `@CONTRIBUTING.md`:
- Around line 52-53: Update the prerequisite sentence in CONTRIBUTING.md to link
readers to the README and repository toolchain configuration as the sources of
truth, removing the hardcoded Python and Node versions while retaining
references to uv and Docker as appropriate.
In `@README.md`:
- Around line 204-216: Declare the language for all four text-only
architecture/layout fenced blocks by changing their opening fences to text
fences: README.md lines 204-216 and 228-251, and README.zh-CN.md lines 189-201
and 213-236. No other content changes are needed.
- Line 21: Fix the first section heading hierarchy by changing the section
heading at README.md lines 21-21 from h3 to h2, and changing the corresponding
Chinese section heading at README.zh-CN.md lines 19-19 from h3 to h2.
In `@STATUS.md`:
- Around line 293-300: Update the status description around the Acquire outcomes
to identify the successful 200 path exclusively as the explicit synthetic
conformance composition. Clearly state that the production/default application
composition is reject-all, while preserving the existing 401 and 503 behavior
and the guarantee that neither path performs content-system calls.
🪄 Autofix (Beta)
Fix all unresolved CodeRabbit comments on this PR:
- Push a commit to this branch (recommended)
- Create a new PR with the fixes
ℹ️ Review info
⚙️ Run configuration
Configuration used: defaults
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro Plus
Run ID: 99abb8fc-453c-4e41-9869-8ae28e479add
📒 Files selected for processing (6)
CONTRIBUTING.mdLICENSEREADME.mdREADME.zh-CN.mdSTATUS.mdpyproject.toml
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: 755650297f
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub
Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
- Open a pull request for review
- Mark a draft as ready
- Comment "@codex review".
If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.
Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: 834e949229
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub
Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
- Open a pull request for review
- Mark a draft as ready
- Comment "@codex review".
If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.
Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".
| |---|---|---| | ||
| | [uv](https://docs.astral.sh/uv/) | — | Dependency resolution, pinned by `uv.lock` | | ||
| | [Python](https://www.python.org/) | `requires-python` in [`pyproject.toml`](./pyproject.toml) — `uv sync` provisions a matching interpreter for you | Engine, adapters, worker | | ||
| | [Node.js](https://nodejs.org/) | [`sdk/typescript/.node-version`](./sdk/typescript/.node-version) — `nvm use`, `fnm use`, and `asdf` read it automatically | TypeScript SDK, ActionPlane, BotDelivery | |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
When a contributor follows this row with nvm, nvm use does not read .node-version: the inspected nvm 0.40.2 help says Uses .nvmrc if available, while the repository has no .nvmrc. In a normal checkout this errors, or it can silently select an unrelated ancestor .nvmrc; sdk/typescript/scripts/verify-runtime.mjs:5-10 then rejects anything other than the exact checked-in Node version. Add .nvmrc or document an explicit command that reads .node-version.
Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.
Main's Issues #88-#94 claimed ADR numbers 0057-0060, so the four course-correction ADRs are renumbered to 0061-0064 with every cross-reference in the ADRs, review document, CONTEXT.md, and PLAN.md updated. The decisions README keeps main's 0055-0058 entries verbatim and appends 0061-0064. The review document's adjustment item for the README status ledger now records that #97 already extracted it to STATUS.md.
1 participant
Makes the repository legible to an open-source reader, and licenses it.
The previous README was an engineering ledger rather than an entry point: roughly 200 of its 306 lines were per-issue activation notes, the "why does this exist" section sat at line 265, and there was no architecture or repository-structure section at all. The precision of that ledger is a genuine asset for a security product — so it was moved, not deleted.
Changes
README.mdREADME.zh-CN.mdSTATUS.mdCONTRIBUTING.mdLICENSEpyproject.tomllicense = "Apache-2.0"+license-files.Nothing under
engine/,adapters/,applications/, ortests/is touched.AGENTS.md,CLAUDE.md,PLAN.md, andCONTEXT.mdare unchanged.Factual errors fixed
The previous README could not be followed successfully:
make installalso runsnpm cifor three TypeScript workspaces — Node 22.12.0 and Docker are hard requirements.POST /v1/context:resolve, which is the legacy path (include_in_schema=False). The public contract frozen inopenapi/v0/openapi.jsonisPOST /v0/resolve.STATUS.md.NOT_ACTIVEafter ADR-0060 activated it. The ADR-indexed table now covers ADR-0030 through ADR-0060.Verification
/healthresponse documented in the README was captured from a running server, not assumed:{"status":"ready","service":"context-engine-api","version":"0.1.0","runtime_delivery":"NOT_ACTIVE"}/v0/resolve→ 400,/v1/context:resolve→ 400,/nonexistent→ 404--test-mode,--run-file-job,--dispatch-file-once,--dispatch-files) verified againstapplications/worker.pymake buildpasses; the built wheel carriesLicense-Expression: Apache-2.0andLicense-File: LICENSEmake lintpassesLICENSEis a byte-identical copy of the canonical Apache-2.0 text (202 lines, appendix included)The full
make checkwas not run locally — CI covers it on this PR.Open items for the maintainer
LICENSEcopyright holder is unfilled. The appendix retains theCopyright [yyyy] [name of copyright owner]template. Choosing an individual or a company is a legal decision; aNOTICEfile or source headers may be preferable.STATUS.mdboundary notes cover through Issue delivery: complete one private File-backed BotDelivery flow #71 only. ADRs 0032–0060 are listed with titles and links but no prose boundary description, because that precise "this proof does not claim X" wording never existed outside the ADRs themselves and should not be paraphrased.Summary by CodeRabbit
Documentation
Chores