docs(skills): loosen uat→main merge gate; CTO Approve only for novel auth, infra/prod, and risk-flagged

The 2026-06-11 merge-whitelist fix (GRO-2348) added a required_approvals
gate on uat→main merges. That gate is only satisfied by a Gitea Approve
click — the issue-thread QA/UAT-deploy/UAT-regression/security
approvals do not clear it. As a result the CTO is the human-in-the-loop
on every routine release-train PR (GRO-2358, GRO-2359 both hit it).

This change introduces an explicit "uat→main merge-gate policy" in
coding-standards: once the four pre-gates (QA, UAT deploy, UAT
regression, security) are green, the engineer self-merges. A CTO
Gitea Approve click is required only for three categories:

  1. Novel auth / session paths (login, OIDC, OOBE, session
     middleware, token issuance, MFA, new auth provider integrations).
  2. Infra / prod-affecting merges (deploys, manifests, secrets,
     GitOps overlays, CI/CD, main branch protection, prod-affecting
     routing/ingress). All Phase 5 infra overlay PRs in
     groombook/infra still require CTO Gitea Approve without
     exception.
  3. Risk-flagged merges (risk:cto-approve label, or explicit
     CTO/CEO sign-off request in the PR or issue thread).

Phase 4 in sdlc is updated to reflect the new flow: engineer
classifies the PR; CTO Approve happens only for the three categories
above; otherwise the engineer merges once the four pre-gates are
green. The pre-gates themselves do not change.

Refs: GRO-2377
Triggers: GRO-2358, GRO-2359
Source rule: GRO-2348 (merge-whitelist fix)
This commit is contained in:
2026-06-12 01:30:45 +00:00
parent 36310c48db
commit 152c52f47c
2 changed files with 29 additions and 8 deletions
+9 -6
View File
@@ -26,7 +26,7 @@ Three long-lived branches map to the three deployment environments:
|--------|-------------|-----------|-----------|
| `dev` | Dev | Engineer | CI passes |
| `uat` | UAT | Engineer | QA code review approval |
| `main` | Production | Engineer | UAT validation & CTO code review |
| `main` | Production | Engineer | UAT validation, security review, and the `coding-standards` uat→main merge-gate policy |
**Engineers always target `dev` first** — never `uat` or `main` directly.
- Feature branches: `<agent-name>/<short-description>`.
@@ -70,11 +70,14 @@ tea pr create --base dev --title "..." --body "... cc @cpfarhood"
1. **Engineer** opens a PR from `uat` to `main`.
2. **CI** fail → back to **Engineer** (return to Phase 1).
3. **CI** pass → **CTO** performs code review.
4. **CTO** rejected → back to **Engineer** (return to Phase 1).
5. **CTO** approved → **Engineer** merges PR.
6. **CI** fail → back to **Engineer** (return to Phase 1).
7. **CI** pass → Begin Phase 5.
3. **CI** pass → **Engineer** classifies the PR against the `coding-standards` **uat→main merge-gate policy**:
* **In a category that requires CTO Gitea Approve** (novel auth / session paths, infra / prod-affecting merges, `risk:cto-approve` label or explicit CTO/CEO sign-off request) → Engineer pings the CTO for a Gitea Approve click.
* **CTO** rejected → back to **Engineer** (return to Phase 1).
* **CTO** approved → continue to step 4.
* **Outside all three categories** → no CTO click needed; jump to step 4 once the four pre-gates (QA, UAT deploy, UAT regression, security) are green.
4. **Engineer** merges the PR.
5. **CI** fail → back to **Engineer** (return to Phase 1).
6. **CI** pass → Begin Phase 5.
### Phase 5 — Production Deployment