Commit graph

20 commits

Author SHA1 Message Date
mateo
ad1ff19195 chore: say real $ instead of $$$ in the bug report proof rules
Co-Authored-By: Devin AI <158243242+devin-ai-integration[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
2026-08-11 16:31:19 +00:00
mateo
10d4213453 chore: drop the bug report proof attestation and tighten its wording
Co-Authored-By: Devin AI <158243242+devin-ai-integration[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
2026-08-11 16:25:52 +00:00
mateo
5643a59aa4 fix: move bug report guidance out of prefilled values so required means filled
Co-Authored-By: Devin AI <158243242+devin-ai-integration[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
2026-08-11 02:58:21 +00:00
mateo
f8a5d6a6a1 docs: make an unfilled bug report proof visibly empty and attested
Co-Authored-By: Devin AI <158243242+devin-ai-integration[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
2026-08-11 02:49:57 +00:00
mateo
550682d5f8 docs: redact only sensitive env vars in bug report proof
Co-Authored-By: Devin AI <158243242+devin-ai-integration[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
2026-08-11 02:36:11 +00:00
mateo
7653532e89 docs: spell out secret redaction in the bug report proof
Co-Authored-By: Devin AI <158243242+devin-ai-integration[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
2026-08-11 02:35:44 +00:00
mateo
7e8faf9267 docs: ask bug reports for the config and version behind the proof
Co-Authored-By: Devin AI <158243242+devin-ai-integration[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
2026-08-11 02:33:10 +00:00
mateo
f096e4c10b docs: require a user flow and live-proxy proof in bug reports
Co-Authored-By: Devin AI <158243242+devin-ai-integration[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
2026-08-11 02:27:07 +00:00
ryan-crabbe-berri
0326722379
docs(issue-template): ask for a numbered list of reproduction steps (#34207) 2026-07-22 01:04:25 +00:00
Harshit Jain
37c014c805
ci(github): add automated duplicate issue checker and template safeguards (#19218) 2026-01-17 00:17:20 +05:30
Alexsander Hamir
05ebb0a739
docs: Add troubleshooting guide (#19096) 2026-01-14 09:17:43 -08:00
Sameer Kankute
548716ab59 Add steps-to-reproduce section in bug report 2026-01-12 13:53:26 +05:30
Cesar Garcia
e34e8b4650
Fix component label automation to prevent false positives (#18765)
* Fix component label automation to prevent false positives

The GitHub Actions workflow was applying component labels (SDK, Proxy, UI Dashboard, Docs) too broadly by only checking if the component name appeared anywhere in the issue body. This caused issues to be mislabeled when users mentioned these terms in their descriptions.

Changes:
- Add more specific condition that checks for both the dropdown field header "What part of LiteLLM is this about?" AND the component name
- Applied to all 4 component labels: SDK, Proxy, UI Dashboard, and Docs
- Labels will now only be applied when users actually select the option from the dropdown

Fixes issues being incorrectly labeled with 'docs' and other component labels.

* Use more specific pattern to match dropdown selection exactly

Updated the label conditions to use a more precise pattern that matches
the dropdown header immediately followed by the selected value. This
prevents false positives when users mention component names in their
descriptions but select a different component.

Before: Checked for header AND component name anywhere in body
After: Checks for exact pattern "header\n\ncomponent"

This ensures labels are only applied when the component is actually
selected from the dropdown, not just mentioned in the issue text.

* Fix component label automation and require explicit user selection

This PR fixes two issues with component labeling:

1. **Improved label accuracy**: Updated the workflow to use exact pattern
   matching ("### What part of LiteLLM is this about?\n\nDocs") instead of
   broad substring matching. This prevents false positives where issues were
   mislabeled when users mentioned component names in their descriptions.

2. **Require explicit component selection**: Added empty string ('') as the
   first dropdown option to prevent GitHub from auto-selecting "SDK" as the
   default. Users must now consciously select which component their issue
   relates to.

Changes:
- Updated all component label conditions in label-component.yml workflow
- Added empty string as first option in bug_report.yml dropdown
- Added empty string as first option in feature_request.yml dropdown
- Labels only apply when users actually select a component from the dropdown

This ensures accurate labeling and prevents the default SDK label from
being applied to all new issues.
2026-01-07 20:01:14 +05:30
Cesar Garcia
cd9b71093a
Improve issue labeling: add component dropdown and more provider keywords (#17957)
- Replace "ML Ops Team" dropdown with "What part of LiteLLM is this about?"
  with options: SDK, Proxy, UI Dashboard, Docs, Other
- Add component dropdown to feature_request.yml template
- Rename label-mlops.yml to label-component.yml and update to auto-label
  issues with sdk, proxy, ui-dashboard, or docs based on selection
- Add more provider keywords to issue-keyword-labeler: gemini, cohere,
  mistral, groq, ollama, deepseek
2025-12-16 09:38:39 +05:30
Krrish Dholakia
7d26c1ab6b ci: fix order of question on issue template 2024-12-03 12:27:55 -08:00
Ishaan Jaff
fd2d4254bc
Update bug_report.yml 2024-12-02 16:27:35 -08:00
Ishaan Jaff
0e517a8570
Update bug_report.yml 2024-12-02 16:27:18 -08:00
Ishaan Jaff
aa3269839d
Update bug_report.yml 2024-12-02 16:25:40 -08:00
Ishaan Jaff
f7a23aee44
Update bug_report.yml 2024-12-02 16:24:49 -08:00
Krish Dholakia
75e8744f8a
Update and rename bug_report.md to bug_report.yml 2023-09-13 07:38:10 -07:00