chore(.github): accept v3 bug reports, add triage dropdowns, wire up auto-labelers#5754
Merged
Conversation
…templates - bug_report.yml: remove the 'no v3 bug reports' banner (v3 bug reports are accepted), add required 'Wails version family' (v3/v2) and 'Operating System' dropdowns, ask for wails3 doctor output (wails doctor for v2), fix v2-era links and mark the v2 binding tests reference as v2-specific alongside the v3 generator path - feature_request.yml: replace the stale Wails v1 notice with the discussion-first note (Discord / GitHub Discussions), matching CONTRIBUTING.md - documentation.yml: point the contribution guidelines link at https://v3.wails.io/contributing/ - config.yml: disable blank issues, align the Discord invite with CONTRIBUTING.md - file-labeler.yml: convert to the actions/labeler v5 configuration format - delete legacy Probot .github/stale.yml (superseded by workflows/stale-issues.yml using actions/stale@v9) - add CODE_OF_CONDUCT.md (Contributor Covenant v2.1)
Consumes the previously orphaned .github/issue-labeler.yml (github/issue-labeler@v3.4, non-versioned regex format) and .github/file-labeler.yml (actions/labeler@v5) configs.
Contributor
|
Note Reviews pausedIt looks like this branch is under active development. To avoid overwhelming you with review comments due to an influx of new commits, CodeRabbit has automatically paused this review. You can configure this behavior by changing the Use the following commands to manage reviews:
Use the checkboxes below for quick actions:
WalkthroughThis PR updates issue templates, labeler automation, contributor guidance, repository governance content, and WEP process documentation. ChangesIssue templates and repo configuration
Estimated code review effort: 2 (Simple) | ~15 minutes Possibly related PRs
Suggested labels: Suggested reviewers: Poem
🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 4 | ❌ 1❌ Failed checks (1 warning)
✅ Passed checks (4 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 |
Collaborator
Author
|
The |
The Wails Enhancement Proposal process (v3/wep) was not referenced anywhere contributors actually look. Reference it from the feature request template, CONTRIBUTING.md and the v3 docs site (contributing page gets a step-by-step summary, feedback page a pointer). Also fixes the stale feedback-guide link in CONTRIBUTING.md (/getting-started/feedback/ -> /feedback/).
The v2 website has published a Contributor Covenant CoC at wails.io/coc with coc@wails.io as the enforcement contact; use the same address in the repo-level file.
Proposals are discussed in the Enhancement Proposals category on GitHub Discussions. Discord remains available for informal chat but is no longer the primary venue. Adds an explicit discuss-first step to the WEP README's Idea Initiation section.
… WEP process Implements the process improvements agreed with the maintainer: - WEP Index table in the README (number, title, status, discussion, implementation) with documented status values - Metadata header in the template (number, status, discussion link, implementor) and a Platform Considerations section - 'Do I Need a WEP?' section defining when a proposal is required - Support is now measured by upvotes on the Enhancement Proposals discussion rather than thumbs-ups on a draft PR - Decisions recorded in a standard comment format; rejected proposals stay findable via the index - Accepted proposals not started within 3 months become up for grabs - Migrated the existing proposal as WEP 0001 (dir renamed to 0001-titlebar-buttons, header added, status Implemented via #3508)
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 1
🤖 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 `@v3/wep/README.md`:
- Around line 56-60: The decision example in the README uses a bare fenced code
block, which triggers markdownlint MD040. Update the fenced snippet in the
decision example by adding a language tag such as text, keeping the content
unchanged, so the markdown example is properly labeled and lint-friendly.
🪄 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: Path: .coderabbit.yaml
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro
Run ID: 2b8943d4-41fa-4dd9-9cb3-a623ab7ffc29
📒 Files selected for processing (4)
docs/src/content/docs/contributing.mdxv3/wep/README.mdv3/wep/WEP_TEMPLATE.mdv3/wep/proposals/0001-titlebar-buttons/proposal.md
✅ Files skipped from review due to trivial changes (2)
- v3/wep/WEP_TEMPLATE.md
- v3/wep/proposals/0001-titlebar-buttons/proposal.md
🚧 Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (1)
- docs/src/content/docs/contributing.mdx
Comment on lines
+56
to
+60
| ``` | ||
| **Decision**: Accepted / Rejected | ||
| **Decided by**: @maintainer(s) | ||
| **Rationale**: A short explanation of the decision. | ||
| ``` |
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
📐 Maintainability & Code Quality | 🟡 Minor | ⚡ Quick win
Label the decision example fence.
The bare fence here triggers MD040 and will keep markdownlint failing on this page. Use a language tag such as text for the snippet.
♻️ Proposed fix
- ```
+ ```text
**Decision**: Accepted / Rejected
**Decided by**: `@maintainer`(s)
**Rationale**: A short explanation of the decision.
</details>
<!-- suggestion_start -->
<details>
<summary>📝 Committable suggestion</summary>
> ‼️ **IMPORTANT**
> Carefully review the code before committing. Ensure that it accurately replaces the highlighted code, contains no missing lines, and has no issues with indentation. Thoroughly test & benchmark the code to ensure it meets the requirements.
```suggestion
🧰 Tools
🪛 markdownlint-cli2 (0.22.1)
[warning] 56-56: Fenced code blocks should have a language specified
(MD040, fenced-code-language)
🤖 Prompt for 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.
In `@v3/wep/README.md` around lines 56 - 60, The decision example in the README
uses a bare fenced code block, which triggers markdownlint MD040. Update the
fenced snippet in the decision example by adding a language tag such as text,
keeping the content unchanged, so the markdown example is properly labeled and
lint-friendly.
Source: Linters/SAST tools
Per maintainer decision: proposals are discussed on the WEP PR itself (comments for feedback, thumbs-up reactions for support), not in a separate discussion thread. Pre-proposal ideas can optionally be floated in the Ideas category on GitHub Discussions or on Discord. Index column Discussion renamed to Proposal.
leaanthony
approved these changes
Jul 7, 2026
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
2 participants
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.
This PR refreshes the contributor-facing issue templates and triage automation for the v3 era.
Summary
wails3 doctoroutput (wails doctorfor v2 projects). Fixed the v2-era links: troubleshooting now points at the stable v2 guide plus the v3 FAQ and feedback pages, and the TypeScript-generation note marksv2/internal/binding/binding_testas v2-only alongside the v3 generator path.v3/wep.v3/wep/README.mdbut was not referenced anywhere contributors actually look. It is now linked from the feature request template,CONTRIBUTING.md, and the v3 docs site: the contributing page gains a step-by-step "Propose an Enhancement (WEP)" summary and the feedback page's Suggestions tab points at it. Also fixed the stale feedback-guide link inCONTRIBUTING.md(/getting-started/feedback/→/feedback/).proposals/0001-titlebar-buttons/, status Implemented via [WEP] Customise Window Titlebars #3508).blank_issues_enabled: false; Discord invite aligned with CONTRIBUTING.md's (discord.gg/JDdSxwjhGf)..github/workflows/labeler.ymlconsuming the previously orphaned configs —github/issue-labeler@v3.4for issues (.github/issue-labeler.yml,enable-versioned-regex: 0to match the existing non-versioned regex format) andactions/labeler@v5for PRs (.github/file-labeler.yml, converted in this PR to the v5changed-files/any-glob-to-any-fileformat, same globs)..github/stale.yml— superseded by.github/workflows/stale-issues.yml(actions/stale@v9).CODE_OF_CONDUCT.md(Contributor Covenant v2.1): the beta-readiness audit flagged that the repo has no root community-health CoC file, even though the project has long published one at wails.io/coc. This adds the same Contributor Covenant at the repo root where GitHub surfaces it to contributors, with the same enforcement contact as the published page (coc@wails.io). The v3 docs contributing page now links to it.Notes for the reviewer
yaml.safe_load; issue forms checked against the GitHub issue-forms schema (body item types, dropdown options, required flags).