omnigraph/docs/dev/codeowners.md

Code ownership

.github/CODEOWNERS is generated — not hand-edited. The source of truth is .github/codeowners-roles.yml, expanded by .github/scripts/render-codeowners.py. CI rejects drift between the two and rejects direct edits to CODEOWNERS that don't accompany a yml change.

This setup gives every role change a reviewable PR and a permanent in-repository audit trail (git log .github/codeowners-roles.yml).

Current roles

Role	Members	Scope
engineering	@aaltshuler	All code under crates/**, repository infrastructure, default for unmapped paths
docs	@aaltshuler, @ragnorc	docs/**, README.md, AGENTS.md, CLAUDE.md, SECURITY.md

GitHub treats multiple owners in a CODEOWNERS line as "any one of them satisfies the review requirement". For docs, either named member can approve. To require N distinct approvers on a specific path, layer a CI check on top (not currently configured).

How to change role membership or path mappings

1. Edit .github/codeowners-roles.yml.
2. Run python3 .github/scripts/render-codeowners.py (requires PyYAML; pip install pyyaml).
3. Commit both files in the same PR.

CI fails the PR if:

• CODEOWNERS was edited without a corresponding yml change, or
• The yml was changed but the rendered CODEOWNERS doesn't match.

How to add a new role

1. Add a new entry to roles: in the yml with a description and members list.
2. Reference the role from paths: (or default:).
3. Regenerate + commit as above.

Why a generator, not direct CODEOWNERS edits?

• Audit trail: git log .github/codeowners-roles.yml is the canonical record of every role change. The rendered CODEOWNERS is a derived artifact.
• Roles are first-class: paths reference roles, not raw handles. Renaming a person or rotating a role updates one place, not every path.
• Future extension: scheduled rotation (weekly on-call, quarterly leads) plugs into the same yml without changing the path mappings. Not enabled today.
• Consistency with the product: omnigraph itself enforces auditable Cedar policy. The repository's code-owner policy follows the same "policy as reviewed code" pattern.