AGENTS.md: add a pushing section - #2
Open
lingrui96 wants to merge 1 commit into
Open
Conversation
The repository has no written rule for how work reaches main, which came up when an agent had to decide between pushing to main directly, the habit visible in the history, and opening a pull request. This states the pull request flow as an instruction rather than a proposal, per the review on #1. Two clauses come from what went wrong on #1 rather than from principle. Force push is allowed only before review, since the branch there was rebuilt to scrub a hostname, which is legitimate while nobody has reviewed and destructive once someone has. And hostnames are kept out of pull request descriptions, not just result files, since the first description of #1 quoted several and had to be edited. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Follow-up to your point on #1, that this belongs in its own change as accepted policy rather than as a proposal awaiting veto. The text is written as instruction, so merging it is the acceptance. Docs only, no code or results touched.
What it says
result/<profile>/names the machine that produced the sweep in its description.Two clauses that came from #1 rather than from principle
The force push clause is conditional, not absolute. The branch on #1 was rebuilt with a force push before review to scrub a hostname from its history. That seemed right at the time and still does, so a blanket ban would have outlawed it; the distinction that actually matters is whether anyone has reviewed yet.
The hostname clause covers descriptions because the first description of #1 quoted several hostnames and had to be edited afterwards. The existing rule only covered files.
Note
This describes the flow #1 followed, not what the history shows: your own commits have gone straight to main, which is normal for a maintainer on their own repository. If you would rather the rule apply only to contributors and agents, or want it softened to a preference, say so and I will reword it. Equally happy to drop any clause you disagree with.
🤖 Generated with Claude Code