Files

tegwick 0d978b1417 feat(canon): add contribution-convention v0.1, contrib/ templates, and first UPR artifact

- canon/standards/contribution-convention_v0.1.md: master spec for BR/FR/EP/UPR
  artifact types, directory layout, frontmatter schema, ID schemes (EP-DOMAIN-NNN
  for extension points), status lifecycle, and relationship to State Hub
- canon/standards/contrib-templates/: four template files (br, fr, ep, upr)
- contrib/upstream-prs/2026-02-26--observablehq--framework--toc-sidebar-inject.md:
  first real UPR artifact — proposes injectTocTop() to Observable Framework

Co-Authored-By: Claude Sonnet 4.6 <noreply@anthropic.com>

2026-02-28 17:28:13 +01:00

1.2 KiB

Raw Blame History

id, type, target_org, target_repo, title, status, domain, related_workstream, state_hub_contribution_id, created, updated, local_component_path, target_upstream_file, upstream_pr_url

id	type	target_org	target_repo	title	status	domain	related_workstream	state_hub_contribution_id	created	updated	local_component_path	target_upstream_file	upstream_pr_url
upr-YYYY-MM-DD--org--repo--slug	upr	<github-org-or-owner>	<repository-name>	Short description of the upstream PR	draft	custodian	null	null	YYYY-MM-DD	YYYY-MM-DD	relative/path/in/this/repo/component.js	path/in/upstream/repo/component.js	null

Upstream PR:

Summary

What this PR adds or fixes in the upstream project.

Motivation

Why we want this upstream rather than keeping it as a local fork. What maintenance burden does upstreaming remove?

Local Component

Path in this repo: <local_component_path> Origin story: How/when this component was created locally.

Target Upstream Location

Repo: <target_org>/<target_repo> File: <target_upstream_file>

Draft PR Body

## Summary

_Fill in the PR summary for the upstream project here._

## Motivation

_Explain why the upstream project would benefit._

## Changes

- …

## Testing

- [ ] Tests added
- [ ] Existing tests pass

Notes

Any upstream discussion, review feedback, or open questions.

1.2 KiB Raw Blame History