Promote develop to main: CODESTYLE consolidation, Copilot runbook, CI quota

.editorconfig

@@ -48,9 +48,15 @@ end_of_line = lf
 [*.{cmd,bat,ps1}]
 end_of_line = crlf
 
+# --- .NET-only below: C# and ReSharper style. Everything above is the line-ending
+# governance every derived repo carries; a non-.NET repo may drop from here down. ---
+
 # C# files
 [*.cs]
 end_of_line = crlf
+# Suppressions follow CODESTYLE.md "Analyzer Diagnostics and Suppressions": prefer a
+# [SuppressMessage] attribute or the owning project's .editorconfig; relax a rule
+# repo-wide here only when it applies to every project (never a brownfield batch).
 dotnet_diagnostic.IDE0055.severity = none
 dotnet_analyzer_diagnostic.severity = suggestion
 csharp_indent_block_contents = true

.github/copilot-instructions.md

@@ -2,58 +2,35 @@
 
 Repository conventions for GitHub Copilot (and any other AI agent reading this file).
 
-The **canonical guide is [AGENTS.md](../AGENTS.md)** at the repo root - read it first. It covers project layout, branch flow, PR review etiquette, the release pipeline, devcontainer behavior, workflow YAML conventions, and what NOT to touch.
+The **canonical guide is [AGENTS.md](../AGENTS.md)** at the repo root - read it first, including the [PR Review Etiquette](../AGENTS.md#pr-review-etiquette) review-loop contract this file's runbook implements. This file is intentionally narrow: commit/PR-title conventions (summarized inline so VS Code's commit-message and PR-title generators have them) plus the GitHub Copilot Review Runbook.
 
-This file is intentionally narrow: commit/PR-title conventions (so VS Code's AI commit-message and PR-title generators get them without an extra fetch), plus a GitHub Copilot Review Runbook that documents the provider-specific mechanics behind the review-loop contract defined in AGENTS.md.
+For code-style rules, see [`CODESTYLE.md`](../CODESTYLE.md) at the repo root - one guide with a General section plus per-language sections (.NET, Python).
 
-For language-specific style rules, see:
-
-- .NET - [`CODESTYLE.md`](../CODESTYLE.md) at the repo root.
-- Python - [`PyPiLibrary/CODESTYLE.md`](../PyPiLibrary/CODESTYLE.md).
-
-Do not duplicate language-specific rules here.
+Do not duplicate language-specific rules here. **Project-specific conventions and API/behavioral contracts also belong in [AGENTS.md](../AGENTS.md), not here** - this file is intentionally limited to the inline commit/PR-title summary and the GitHub Copilot Review Runbook. Non-Copilot agents (Claude Code, Codex, Cursor, ...) are not directed to this file and don't read it by default, so any rule a reviewer must honor has to live in `AGENTS.md` to be provider-independent.
 
 ## Commit Messages and Pull Request Titles
 
-Feature -> develop PRs squash-merge - the PR title becomes the single commit on develop. Develop -> main PRs merge-commit - main's history shows one merge commit per release with develop's tip as the second parent. Titles are descriptive and have no versioning effect - versioning is handled by [Nerdbank.GitVersioning](https://github.com/dotnet/Nerdbank.GitVersioning) reading [version.json](../version.json) and git history, not by parsing commit messages.
-
-`develop` leads `main` by a minor. After a `develop -> main` release lands and main's publish completes, bump the minor in [version.json](../version.json) on `develop` via an isolated `bump-version-X.Y` PR, so develop's prereleases sort above main's last stable. A `develop -> main` promotion that carries only maintenance (not a release) holds main's version instead - `git checkout main -- version.json` on the promotion branch. See [AGENTS.md "Release Model"](../AGENTS.md#release-model).
-
-Branch protection enforces the merge method on both bases (develop allows only squash, main allows only merge). When running `gh pr merge` against either base, pick the matching flag (`--squash` for develop, `--merge` for main); a mismatch fails with "Merge method ... is not allowed on this repository". The merge-bot workflow (`.github/workflows/merge-bot-pull-request.yml`) does this dispatch automatically for Dependabot and codegen PRs via a `case` on `base.ref` - keep that pattern when adding new auto-merge jobs.
-
-### Format
-
-- Imperative subject summarizing the change, <= 72 characters, no trailing period. ("Add 24-hour PM2.5 average sensor", not "Added X" or "Adds X".)
-- Optional body, blank-line separated, explaining *why* the change is being made when that's non-obvious. The diff shows *what*.
-
-### Rules
+Summarized for VS Code's generators; the full rules, rationale, and examples are in [AGENTS.md "Pull Request Title and Commit Message Conventions"](../AGENTS.md#pull-request-title-and-commit-message-conventions).
 
-- Don't write `update stuff`, `wip`, or other vague titles. (Dependabot's default `Bump X from Y to Z` titles are fine - keep them.)
-- Don't add `Co-Authored-By:` lines unless the user explicitly asks.
-- Don't put release-bump magnitude in the title - no "minor", "patch", "release v0.2.0", etc. NBGV computes the next release version from `version.json` + git history. Dependency versions in dependency-bump titles are fine and expected.
-- Use US English spelling and match the existing heading style of the file you're editing: title case with lowercase short bind words (a, an, the, and, but, or, of, in, on, at, to, by, for, from); hyphenated compounds capitalize both parts unless the second is a short preposition (*Built-in*, *EPA-Corrected*, *24-Hour*).
-
-### Examples
-
-```text
-Add structured logging extensions to library
-Pin softprops/action-gh-release to commit SHA
-Drop net8.0 multi-targeting from console project
-Bump xunit.v3 from 3.2.2 to 3.3.0
-Clarify devcontainer setup steps in README
-```
+- Imperative subject, <= 72 characters, no trailing period; optional blank-line-separated body for the non-obvious *why*.
+- US English, title case with lowercase short bind words; no vague titles, no `Co-Authored-By:` unless asked, no release-bump magnitude (NBGV handles versioning). Dependabot's `Bump X from Y to Z` titles are fine.
+- develop PRs squash-merge (`gh pr merge --squash`), main PRs merge-commit (`--merge`); a mismatched flag is rejected by branch protection.
 
 ## GitHub Copilot Review Runbook
 
-> **Carry this runbook verbatim into every derived repo.** This whole file is a drop-in: copy it as-is and change only the `<owner>` / `<repo>` / `<N>` placeholders in the snippets below (and drop the language-specific style pointers that don't apply). It pairs with the [AGENTS.md "PR Review Etiquette"](../AGENTS.md#pr-review-etiquette) contract, which is also a mandatory verbatim carry - see [AGENTS.md "Files and Sections Derived Repos Must Carry Verbatim"](../AGENTS.md#files-and-sections-derived-repos-must-carry-verbatim). A derived repo without this runbook in-repo has no pointer to the reliable Copilot mechanics and falls back to known-broken paths (the no-op `POST /requested_reviewers`, the wrong bot-login filter).
+> This runbook implements the [AGENTS.md "PR Review Etiquette"](../AGENTS.md#pr-review-etiquette) review-loop contract for GitHub Copilot. Without it in-repo, an agent has no pointer to the reliable Copilot mechanics and falls back to known-broken paths (the no-op `POST /requested_reviewers`, the wrong bot-login filter). In the API snippets below, fill the `<owner>` / `<repo>` / `<N>` placeholders.
 
 Use this section for provider-specific mechanics. The expected review loop *contract* (request review on every push, verify head-SHA coverage, triage findings, reply + resolve, escalate when stuck) is defined in [AGENTS.md -> PR Review Etiquette](../AGENTS.md#pr-review-etiquette). This section only describes how to make GitHub Copilot reliably execute it.
 
 ### Triggering and Polling
 
-Auto-review on push is configured (via the branch ruleset's `copilot_code_review` rule with `review_on_push: true`) but fires inconsistently in practice - treat it as best-effort, not guaranteed. After every push, **re-request a review programmatically** via the GraphQL `requestReviews` mutation, passing the Copilot reviewer's bot node id in `botIds`. This now works reliably (it previously did not - a maintainer had to click "re-request review" in the UI; the agent can now drive the loop end-to-end without that hand-off).
+Auto-review on push is configured (via the branch ruleset's `copilot_code_review` rule with `review_on_push: true`) but fires inconsistently in practice - treat it as best-effort, not guaranteed. After every push, **re-request a review programmatically** via the GraphQL `requestReviews` mutation, passing the Copilot reviewer's bot node id in `botIds`. This drives the loop end-to-end without a UI hand-off.
 
-> **The reviewer login differs by API - this is intentional, not a typo.** In **GraphQL** (`gh api graphql` and `gh pr view --json reviews`, which is GraphQL-backed) the `Bot.login` is `copilot-pull-request-reviewer` - **no `[bot]` suffix**. In the **REST** API (`gh api repos/.../issues|pulls/...`) the same account's `user.login` is `copilot-pull-request-reviewer[bot]` - **with** the suffix. Each query below uses the correct form for its API; match the API, not a single spelling, when adapting them.
+**A review with no inline comments is still a completed review - not a failure, and not a reason to ask the maintainer to re-trigger.** Copilot very often posts a single formal review (GraphQL `state: COMMENTED`) whose body ends with "...reviewed N of N changed files ... and generated no comments" and adds **zero** inline threads. That review carries the head `commit.oid` and fully satisfies the loop - it is the clean-pass success case. Never read "no inline comments" as "the review didn't run," and never re-request or escalate to the maintainer because comments are absent.
+
+**Round 1 is normally auto-seeded - poll for it before trying to self-trigger.** Auto-review-on-open supplies the first review with no `botIds` call needed, but it can lag one to three minutes. After opening a PR (or the first push), **poll** for a Copilot review on the head SHA (see [Verify Review Covered Current Head](#verify-review-covered-current-head)) before concluding none ran. The `requestReviews` mutation below is for **re-requesting on later pushes** (a new head SHA); by then a prior review exists, so its bot node id is readable. A missing bot node id on round 1 therefore means "the auto-review has not landed yet - wait and poll," **not** "ask the maintainer to kick it off."
+
+> **The reviewer login differs by API.** In **GraphQL** (`gh api graphql` and `gh pr view --json reviews`, which is GraphQL-backed) the `Bot.login` is `copilot-pull-request-reviewer` - **no `[bot]` suffix**. In the **REST** API (`gh api repos/.../issues|pulls/...`) the same account's `user.login` is `copilot-pull-request-reviewer[bot]` - **with** the suffix. Each query below uses the correct form for its API; match the API, not a single spelling, when adapting them.
 
 ```sh
 # 1. PR node id + the Copilot reviewer's bot node id (read from any existing
@@ -79,7 +56,7 @@ mutation($pr: ID!, $bot: ID!) {
 }' -F pr="$PR_NODE" -F bot="$BOT_ID"
 ```
 
-The bot node id is read from an existing Copilot review, so step 1 needs at least one prior review on the PR - the auto-review-on-open normally supplies the first one. If no Copilot review exists yet and auto-review didn't fire, request `Copilot` once through the GitHub PR UI to seed it, then use the mutation for every subsequent re-request.
+The bot node id is read from an existing Copilot **formal** review (`pullRequest.reviews`), so step 1 needs at least one prior formal review on the PR - the auto-review-on-open normally supplies the first one (it may have **no inline comments**; that still counts, and its bot node id is still readable). Poll for it (give auto-review-on-open a few minutes) before deciding it is missing. If Copilot posted **only an issue comment** and no formal review, the head is covered but `reviews` yields no bot node id - read the id from the Copilot issue comment's author by querying the PR's issue comments in GraphQL (`pullRequest.comments` -> author `... on Bot { id }`), or request `Copilot` once through the GitHub PR UI to produce a formal review. Manual UI seeding is the fallback specifically when no formal review exists to read the id from; then use the mutation for every subsequent re-request.
 
 **Do NOT post `@Copilot review` as a PR comment.** That comment triggers the Copilot *coding agent* (`copilot-swe-agent[bot]`), which makes code changes rather than posting a review.
 
@@ -106,10 +83,12 @@ gh api repos/<owner>/<repo>/issues/<N>/comments --jq \
   '[.[] | select(.user.login=="copilot-pull-request-reviewer[bot]")] | last | {created_at, body: .body[:200]}'
 ```
 
-Coverage is confirmed when (1) exits 0. For issue comments (path 2), body content is the only reliable signal - `created_at` is not: `git log -1 --format=%cI` is the **commit** timestamp, not the push timestamp, so amended or rebased commits can have an earlier timestamp and an older Copilot comment could satisfy a time check even though Copilot never saw the current head. Treat path (2) as confirmed only when the comment body explicitly refers to the current changes.
+Coverage is confirmed when (1) exits 0 - **a formal review with no inline comments still satisfies path (1)**, because coverage is about the head SHA, not the comment count. For issue comments (path 2), body content is the only reliable signal - `created_at` is not: `git log -1 --format=%cI` is the **commit** timestamp, not the push timestamp, so amended or rebased commits can have an earlier timestamp and an older Copilot comment could satisfy a time check even though Copilot never saw the current head. Treat path (2) as confirmed only when the comment body explicitly refers to the current changes.
 
 ### Bounded Retry Workflow
 
+This path is only for a **genuinely missing** review - no Copilot review (formal *or* issue comment) covers the current head SHA after polling. A review that covered the head but produced no comments is a clean pass, not a missing review; do not enter this retry path for it.
+
 If a review did not run on the current head, retry:
 
 1. Wait briefly and check head-SHA coverage (see above).
@@ -163,13 +142,13 @@ Issue-level Copilot comments (those in `issues/<N>/comments`) have no resolution
 Reply-body conventions:
 
 - Accepted bug/style fix: include fixing commit SHA and a one-line summary.
-- Declined style comment: cite the rule (AGENTS.md or language CODESTYLE) and the existing-tree precedent.
+- Declined style comment: cite the rule (AGENTS.md or the CODESTYLE.md language section) and the existing-tree precedent.
 - Declined architecture proposal: one-sentence rationale.
 
 After the final push, sweep-resolve stale older threads for removed code paths.
 
 ## When in Doubt
 
-Read [AGENTS.md](../AGENTS.md) for the full picture (release flow, files you must not touch, branching, workflow YAML, devcontainer). For language-specific rules, the per-language CODESTYLE files are authoritative. Don't restate any of these files' rules in commit bodies or PR descriptions - keep those focused on the change itself.
+Read [AGENTS.md](../AGENTS.md) for this repo's conventions. For code-style rules, [`CODESTYLE.md`](../CODESTYLE.md) (its General section plus the relevant language section) is authoritative. Don't restate any of these files' rules in commit bodies or PR descriptions - keep those focused on the change itself.
 
-**In a derived repo:** if you find a discrepancy that should be fixed in the template itself (this file or AGENTS.md is out of date, a rule is missing, something bit this repo and would bite the next), open an issue upstream in [`ptr727/ProjectTemplate`](https://github.com/ptr727/ProjectTemplate) rather than only fixing it locally - see [AGENTS.md "Staying in Sync and Reporting Drift Upstream"](../AGENTS.md#staying-in-sync-and-reporting-drift-upstream).
+**In a derived repo:** if you find a discrepancy that should be fixed in the template itself (this file or AGENTS.md is out of date, a rule is missing, something bit this repo and would bite the next), open an issue upstream in [`ptr727/ProjectTemplate`](https://github.com/ptr727/ProjectTemplate) rather than only fixing it locally - see the template's [AGENTS.md "Staying in Sync and Reporting Drift Upstream"](https://github.com/ptr727/ProjectTemplate/blob/main/AGENTS.md#staying-in-sync-and-reporting-drift-upstream).