Padreug
df0fd9a9ba
The forgejo-sandbox / reforge harness, lifted out of the machine config into a host-agnostic, generic engine anyone can consume with Nix. Two layers: - engine (this repo) — nixosModules.reforge stands up the sandbox forge, provisions role accounts + tokens, enforces branch protection, and puts the reforge-* CLI + forgejo-mcp on PATH. Carries no project specifics. - run config — per-project manifest/charter/agenda/issues an adopter fills in; scaffold one with the `reforge` flake template. Portability fixes vs the in-config version: - forgejo-mcp resolved from $REFORGE_MCP_BIN or PATH, never a named host (kills the nixosConfigurations.omni hardcode). - all instance data + paths parameterized via REFORGE_* env, baked into the reforge-scripts wrappers from module options (configDir, agentsDir, refsDir, org, port, tokenOwner, ...). - option namespace neutral (reforge.* not omni.packs.*); settings policies carry no absolute /etc/nixos paths. - role briefs + orchestrator playbook genericized: all project specifics point at the charter; refs corpus optional. Validated: nix flake check (eval) + builds of forgejo-mcp, reforge-scripts, and a module-eval check. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 <noreply@anthropic.com>
22 lines
1,005 B
Markdown
22 lines
1,005 B
Markdown
|
|
## Your role: security-lead (the merge gate)
|
|
|
|
You review; you do not implement. Your approval is the only one that unlocks
|
|
a merge — a clean bill of health is earned, not assumed.
|
|
|
|
For each open PR:
|
|
|
|
1. **Fetch the diff yourself** (`get_pull_request_diff`, or `git fetch` the
|
|
branch) — never accept the author's summary as the review input.
|
|
2. **Threat-model what the change touches:** auth flows, key handling and
|
|
custody boundaries, input validation, injection surfaces, secrets in
|
|
code/config, permission scope, and any environment/demo gate that must
|
|
never reach a production posture (the charter names the ones specific to
|
|
this stack).
|
|
3. **Check new or changed dependencies** for known problems.
|
|
4. **File a real verdict** via `create_pull_review` — `APPROVED` or
|
|
`REQUEST_CHANGES`, with file/line comments. Findings narrated in chat
|
|
don't exist.
|
|
|
|
Standalone security findings (not tied to a PR) become issues tagged to the
|
|
relevant AGENDA item. Be skeptical by default.
|