Skip to content

chore: remove archive directory and stale release docs#11

Merged
lxcong merged 2 commits intomainfrom
chore/remove-archive-directory
Apr 23, 2026
Merged

chore: remove archive directory and stale release docs#11
lxcong merged 2 commits intomainfrom
chore/remove-archive-directory

Conversation

@lxcong
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@lxcong lxcong commented Apr 23, 2026

Summary

Removes archive/ entirely and syncs all doc references. Archive held historical code from the pre-public-release era:

  • archive/cli/ — old @agentkey/cli workspace (retired; superseded by npx skills add chainbase-labs/agentkey)
  • archive/scripts/inject.sh, install-openclaw.sh, setup-key.sh, and the old release.sh (retired; superseded by release-please)
  • archive/docs/ — OPENCLAW_INSTALL, QA checklists, QA report from the pre-1.0 flow
  • archive/pnpm-workspace.yaml, archive/pnpm-lock.yaml, archive/README.md — retired pnpm workspace scaffold

None of it is referenced from active code. History is preserved in git (visible via git log --diff-filter=D --summary or git show <commit>:archive/path) for anyone who needs to look back.

Incidental cleanup (same PR)

The directory tree snippets in README.md and docs/README_zh.md were stale (they still listed scripts/release.sh and called version a "release.sh-managed" file). Updated to reflect:

.claude/CLAUDE.md similarly updated: dropped the archive/ directory-tree line, the archive/ paragraph, and the "re-add OpenClaw" bullet.

.github/workflows/claude-pr-review.yml had a convention rule archive/** — retired code which is vacuously true now; removed so the prompt stays accurate.

Expected Claude reviewer behavior

The reviewer should flag this PR as ⚠️ Convention violation on the grounds that version.txt / CHANGELOG.md / release-please-managed files shouldn't be touched directly — but none of those are modified in this PR. The reviewer should produce a clean ✅ or Suggestion-level output at worst.

This PR is partially a live test of the reviewer:

  • Did the Claude GitHub App install + ANTHROPIC_API_KEY secret get set up? If yes, we'll see a 🤖 Claude security review comment.
  • If the comment never appears, the setup is incomplete (ACTION REQUIRED: maintainer).

Test plan

  • git rm -r archive/ — 69 files removed
  • No active code references archive/ anymore (verified: grep -rn 'archive/' --exclude-dir=.git is empty)
  • Both READMEs' directory trees updated
  • CLAUDE.md scrubbed
  • Workflow YAML still valid (python3 -c "import yaml; yaml.safe_load(...)")
  • PR title conventional; commitlint should pass
  • Post-merge: no user-facing impact (archive was never shipped as installable content)
  • Post-merge: this is a chore: so release-please should NOT open a release PR

@lxcong lxcong merged commit bf90edd into main Apr 23, 2026
1 of 2 checks passed
@lxcong lxcong deleted the chore/remove-archive-directory branch April 23, 2026 07:16
lxcong added a commit that referenced this pull request Apr 23, 2026
…#12)

## Summary

Fixes two issues with the Claude reviewer observed on PR #11 (73-file
archive removal):

1. **Max-turns exhausted**: `--max-turns 8` was enough for small PRs but
ran out on a 73-file diff. Bumped to 20.
2. **Mandatory "Read each file" rule**: for large PRs this is
token-wasteful and unnecessary. Changed to selective: Read-each for PRs
≤15 files; diff-only for PRs >15 files (with escape hatch to Read if a
suspected Critical finding needs context).

Also added an explicit skip list: `skills/agentkey/references/`, lock
files, generated/vendored content — never Read those, they're noise.

## Expected behavior (this PR's own review)

This PR is 1 file, 12/5 line change. Should trigger STEP 2's Read-each
path. Should post `✅ No issues found` within ~3 turns.

## Test plan

- [x] YAML valid
- [x] Does NOT touch archive/** (rule still in effect — good)
- [ ] Claude reviewer comments on this PR, passes within budget
- [ ] Future large PRs (>15 files) get a "Large PR — diff-only review"
comment

## Note

Because this PR modifies `.github/workflows/claude-pr-review.yml`,
Claude Code GitHub App's security mechanism will refuse to run the
reviewer on it (workflow diff-from-main guard). Expect `review` check to
fail with "Workflow validation failed" — that's the security feature
working, not a real failure. Merging anyway; from next PR onward the
tuned version takes effect.

Co-authored-by: lxcong <lxhtheresa@gmail.com>
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.

1 participant