Thanks to visit codestin.com
Credit goes to github.com

Skip to content

Conversation

Copy link
Contributor

Copilot AI commented Dec 29, 2025

CrowdCode needed comprehensive documentation enabling maintainers to understand and safely trial the vote-gated, AI-assisted development workflow with full awareness of security implications and control mechanisms.

Documentation Structure

Core Documentation (5 new files)

  • docs/index.md - Glossary (Issue → PR → Vote → Promote), role definitions, navigation hub
  • docs/setup.md - Installation (files, labels, permissions, secrets, schedules), verification checklist
  • docs/workflows.md - All 4 GitHub Actions workflows with disable methods (4 per workflow)
  • docs/governance.md - PatchPanel membership, vote counting (reactions vs reviews), conflict resolution
  • docs/threat-model.md - 8 threat categories with mitigations (prompt injection, spam, malicious PRs, vote manipulation, dependency attacks, hallucinations, workflow compromise, privacy violations)

README Updates

  • Quick trial path for test repositories
  • Updated navigation to new documentation structure

Safety Emphasis

Every workflow has documented disable mechanisms:

# Option 1: Delete workflow
git rm .github/workflows/crowdcode-issue-to-pr.yml

# Option 2: Rename (easy re-enable)
mv .github/workflows/crowdcode-issue-to-pr.yml{,.disabled}

# Option 3: Disable AI generation only
ai_generation:
  enabled: false

# Option 4: Manual trigger only (remove schedule)

Data Privacy

Explicitly documents what data flows to model providers:

  • ✅ Sent: Issue descriptions, repository context
  • ❌ Never sent: Secrets, PII, vote tallies, PatchPanel membership

Role Definitions

Role Authority Restrictions
Proposer Submit feature requests Cannot auto-merge or bypass voting
Voter Approve/reject via reactions or reviews Cannot bypass security checks
Maintainer Configure, disable workflows, override Full control with audit trail

Threat Analysis

Comprehensive security coverage with attack scenarios and mitigations:

  • Malicious feature requests → Human review + vote threshold + CI gates
  • Spam issues → Rate limiting (max 5/run) + interaction restrictions
  • Vote manipulation → Membership file in Git + CODEOWNERS protection
  • Dependency attacks → Dependency review action + package verification checklist

Total: ~3,400 lines covering installation, automation, governance, and security for safe trial adoption.

Original prompt

You are the repo documentation agent for a GitHub-native, vote-gated, AI-assisted development workflow.

Goal: make it easy for a maintainer to understand and trial this workflow in another repo, safely.

Rules:

  • Treat “AI-generated code” as a proposal that must be reviewed; emphasize controls.
  • Document roles: proposer, voter, maintainer/operator.
  • Include abuse and safety considerations (spam issues, prompt injection, malicious PRs).

Deliverables:

  1. docs/index.md

    • Concept overview + glossary (Issue → PR → Vote → Promote)
    • Links to setup, workflows, governance, threat model
  2. docs/setup.md

    • How to install CrowdCode into a repo (files to copy / configs)
    • Required labels, permissions, secrets, and schedules
  3. docs/workflows.md

    • Describe each GitHub Action workflow and what it does
    • Inputs/outputs and how to disable safely
  4. docs/governance.md

    • PatchPanel membership and voting thresholds
    • How votes are counted (reactions vs reviews)
    • How to resolve ties / conflicts
  5. docs/threat-model.md

    • What can go wrong (malicious issues, dependency attacks, model hallucinations)
    • Mitigations (restricted scopes, allowlists, human review, CI gates)
  6. README.md

    • “Try it quickly” path + status/roadmap

Quality checks:

  • Every automation step has an “off switch.”
  • Explicitly document what data goes to model providers (if any) and what should never be sent.

💬 We'd love your input! Share your thoughts on Copilot coding agent in our 2 minute survey.

Copilot AI changed the title [WIP] Add documentation for vote-gated AI-assisted workflow Add maintainer-focused documentation for safe CrowdCode workflow adoption Dec 29, 2025
Copilot AI requested a review from evcatalyst December 29, 2025 15:22
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants