forked from NVIDIA/nemoclaw-community
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 0
Expand file tree
/
Copy pathgeneric.yaml
More file actions
53 lines (52 loc) · 1.92 KB
/
Copy pathgeneric.yaml
File metadata and controls
53 lines (52 loc) · 1.92 KB
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
# SPDX-FileCopyrightText: Copyright (c) 2026 NVIDIA CORPORATION & AFFILIATES. All rights reserved.
# SPDX-License-Identifier: Apache-2.0
#
# Evidence-free portable shape example only. Its priorities are checklist
# prompts, not claims about an arbitrary real repository. The one-command
# initializer replaces identity, source evidence, components, and priorities
# with a trusted-tree census for the repository being installed; maintainers
# must customize any fallback that still lacks repository-specific evidence.
schema_version: 1
kind: review-advisor-profile
metadata:
name: Portable repository baseline
source_commit: "0000000000000000000000000000000000000000"
source_ref: refs/heads/main
repository:
identity: example/repository
default_branch: main
review_scope:
mode: repository
roots: []
support_paths: []
required_stages:
- scope
- correctness
- security
- tests
- operations
- reconcile
- synthesize
components:
- id: repository
paths:
- "**"
evidence:
- source: deterministic trusted-tree census
priorities:
- id: portable-correctness
title: Correctness, compatibility, and regression safety
rationale: Evidence-free checklist prompt only; establish intended behavior from current code and tests, and do not assume a framework or repository layout.
evidence: []
- id: portable-security
title: Trust boundaries and least privilege
rationale: Evidence-free checklist prompt only; use current code to identify data crossing privilege, credential, network, parser, persistence, and publication boundaries.
evidence: []
test_surfaces: []
evidence_policy:
memory_is_hint_only: true
require_current_code_evidence: true
unresolved_questions:
- Which paths require specialist or security-owner review?
- Which test suites and runtime validations cover each component?
- Which generated, vendored, migration, deployment, and compatibility paths need special handling?