chore(ci): drop the dead CONTRIBUTING delete rule in the vscode workflow - #9
Conversation
The rule deletes editors/vscode/.github/CONTRIBUTING.md when a root .github guide is present, and that nested guide does exist on main - intentional, not a duplicate. The rule is dead code (GitHub reads workflows only at the repository root, and this one is nested), but it is a trap for whoever later lifts the workflow up. #7 removed the same rule from the other five nested workflows; this file only had its header comment changed there, which left the rule itself in place.
|
No actionable comments were generated in the recent review. 🎉 ℹ️ Recent review info⚙️ Run configurationConfiguration used: Organization UI Review profile: ASSERTIVE Plan: Advanced Run ID: 📒 Files selected for processing (1)
💤 Files with no reviewable changes (1)
Included review availability: Your plan provides up to 1 included review per hour; 0 remain after this review. 📜 Recent review details⏰ Context from checks skipped due to timeout. (6)
📝 SummarySummary by CodeRabbit
WalkthroughThe rhodibot workflow no longer deletes ChangesContribution guide preservation
Priority: ⬇️ Low Estimated code review effort: 1 (Trivial) | ~5 minutes Change: Other 🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 5✅ Passed checks (5 passed)
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. A rabbit guards the guide with care Comment |
|



#7 removed the dead
CONTRIBUTINGdelete rule from five of the six nested rhodibot workflows, but ineditors/vscode/…it changed only the header comment — the rule itself is still there:editors/vscode/.github/CONTRIBUTING.mdexists onmain— it is a deliberate nested guide, not a duplicate. Nothing is at risk today (GitHub reads workflows only at the repository root, and this one is nested), but a rule that deletes a real file is not something to leave lying about for whoever moves this workflow up later.This is the same removal #7 made in the other five files, applied to the sixth.