13e981e9dd* chore: restore repo files dropped by the v2 tree swap
A sweep of the pre-swap tree (ac3c1a12) against v2/main turned up 14 files the
tree swap dropped and that were never restored to either branch. Most are
correctly gone (v1 CI workflows, v1 sample-config, husky hook, two 0-byte
files, v1-specific prettier config). These four are worth having:
- .github/dependabot.yml — rewritten, not restored. v1's covered only
github-actions at /; this covers github-actions plus the six npm manifests
v2 actually has (root + four clients), monthly rather than weekly, grouped
to one PR per ecosystem/directory, targeting v2/main, and labeled `v2` so
the version-label rule holds for bot PRs too.
- .github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/bug_report.md — rewritten. v1's asked for an
"Inspector Version e.g. 0.16.5" and had no client or version field. Under
the issues-only policy this template is the primary intake, so it now asks
the routing questions first (v1 vs v2, which client) and points at the
prompt-not-a-diff path.
- .gitattributes — restored byte-for-byte (package-lock.json
linguist-generated=true). More useful in v2 than v1: there are now six
lockfiles, and they dominate dependency-bump diffs.
- CODE_OF_CONDUCT.md — restored byte-for-byte, so GitHub surfaces it as a
community standard. Left unformatted deliberately: it is verbatim upstream
Contributor Covenant text, v1 listed it in .prettierignore for that reason,
and no v2 format glob reaches root markdown.
CONTRIBUTING.md is deliberately not restored here — it is handled by renaming
CONTRIBUTORS.md to that name, which also lights up GitHub's contributing
banner without leaving two files to keep in sync.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01YAt8rqxysNbhYWLhoRm3fU
* docs(dependabot): state the documented target-branch/security-update rule
Copilot review: the comment read as if `target-branch` had no bearing on
security updates. Per GitHub's Dependabot options reference, an entry whose
`target-branch` names a non-default branch is not applied to security
updates at all — so the schedule/labels/groups here shape version updates
only, and security PRs continue to be raised against the default branch.
Comment-only; the configured settings are unchanged.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01YAt8rqxysNbhYWLhoRm3fU
* docs: correct the branch description and the labeling ask
Two suppressed Copilot comments, both correct:
- dependabot.yml called `main` "release-only". It isn't — README.md and
AGENTS.md both describe it as the legacy v1 implementation taking security
and bug fixes only. Reworded to match, keeping the point that matters
(Dependabot reads config from the default branch).
- bug_report.md asked reporters to label the issue `v2`/`v1`, which most
external reporters have no permission to do. It now asks only for the
version checkbox and says a maintainer labels it at triage.
Comment/prose only; no configured Dependabot setting changed.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01YAt8rqxysNbhYWLhoRm3fU
* docs(dependabot): describe main as release-only, not "legacy v1"
Reverts the branch description introduced in c7fbf350. That change was made to
match README.md:17 and AGENTS.md — but those are precisely the stale sentences
PR #1866 exists to correct. `main` has not been the legacy v1 implementation
since the go-live tree swap; it is the release branch holding the latest
released v2, and the deprecated v1 line lives on `v1/main`.
So the comment now describes the real model: v2/main is the develop branch,
main is release-only and receives milestone merges, v1/main is maintenance and
takes security fixes only.
The rest of c7fbf350 stands — the bug_report.md change (asking reporters for
the version checkbox rather than to apply a label they lack permission to set)
was a genuine catch.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01YAt8rqxysNbhYWLhoRm3fU
---------
Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
5.1 KiB
Contributor Covenant Code of Conduct
Our Pledge
We as members, contributors, and leaders pledge to make participation in our community a harassment-free experience for everyone, regardless of age, body size, visible or invisible disability, ethnicity, sex characteristics, gender identity and expression, level of experience, education, socio-economic status, nationality, personal appearance, race, religion, or sexual identity and orientation.
We pledge to act and interact in ways that contribute to an open, welcoming, diverse, inclusive, and healthy community.
Our Standards
Examples of behavior that contributes to a positive environment for our community include:
- Demonstrating empathy and kindness toward other people
- Being respectful of differing opinions, viewpoints, and experiences
- Giving and gracefully accepting constructive feedback
- Accepting responsibility and apologizing to those affected by our mistakes, and learning from the experience
- Focusing on what is best not just for us as individuals, but for the overall community
Examples of unacceptable behavior include:
- The use of sexualized language or imagery, and sexual attention or advances of any kind
- Trolling, insulting or derogatory comments, and personal or political attacks
- Public or private harassment
- Publishing others' private information, such as a physical or email address, without their explicit permission
- Other conduct which could reasonably be considered inappropriate in a professional setting
Enforcement Responsibilities
Community leaders are responsible for clarifying and enforcing our standards of acceptable behavior and will take appropriate and fair corrective action in response to any behavior that they deem inappropriate, threatening, offensive, or harmful.
Community leaders have the right and responsibility to remove, edit, or reject comments, commits, code, wiki edits, issues, and other contributions that are not aligned to this Code of Conduct, and will communicate reasons for moderation decisions when appropriate.
Scope
This Code of Conduct applies within all community spaces, and also applies when an individual is officially representing the community in public spaces. Examples of representing our community include using an official e-mail address, posting via an official social media account, or acting as an appointed representative at an online or offline event.
Enforcement
Instances of abusive, harassing, or otherwise unacceptable behavior may be reported to the community leaders responsible for enforcement at mcp-coc@anthropic.com. All complaints will be reviewed and investigated promptly and fairly.
All community leaders are obligated to respect the privacy and security of the reporter of any incident.
Enforcement Guidelines
Community leaders will follow these Community Impact Guidelines in determining the consequences for any action they deem in violation of this Code of Conduct:
1. Correction
Community Impact: Use of inappropriate language or other behavior deemed unprofessional or unwelcome in the community.
Consequence: A private, written warning from community leaders, providing clarity around the nature of the violation and an explanation of why the behavior was inappropriate. A public apology may be requested.
2. Warning
Community Impact: A violation through a single incident or series of actions.
Consequence: A warning with consequences for continued behavior. No interaction with the people involved, including unsolicited interaction with those enforcing the Code of Conduct, for a specified period of time. This includes avoiding interactions in community spaces as well as external channels like social media. Violating these terms may lead to a temporary or permanent ban.
3. Temporary Ban
Community Impact: A serious violation of community standards, including sustained inappropriate behavior.
Consequence: A temporary ban from any sort of interaction or public communication with the community for a specified period of time. No public or private interaction with the people involved, including unsolicited interaction with those enforcing the Code of Conduct, is allowed during this period. Violating these terms may lead to a permanent ban.
4. Permanent Ban
Community Impact: Demonstrating a pattern of violation of community standards, including sustained inappropriate behavior, harassment of an individual, or aggression toward or disparagement of classes of individuals.
Consequence: A permanent ban from any sort of public interaction within the community.
Attribution
This Code of Conduct is adapted from the Contributor Covenant, version 2.0, available at https://www.contributor-covenant.org/version/2/0/code_of_conduct.html.
Community Impact Guidelines were inspired by Mozilla's code of conduct enforcement ladder.
For answers to common questions about this code of conduct, see the FAQ at https://www.contributor-covenant.org/faq. Translations are available at https://www.contributor-covenant.org/translations.