GitHub: add regression bug issue template and routing by Takhoffman · Pull Request #29864 · openclaw/openclaw

Takhoffman · 2026-02-28T15:46:37Z

Summary

Describe the problem and fix in 2–5 bullets:

Problem: Regression reports were mixed into the generic bug template, making regressions less visible at intake.
Why it matters: Regressions need immediate triage signal because they imply previously working behavior broke.
What changed: Added a dedicated Regression bug report issue form with [Regression Bug]: title prefix and required regression-window fields; updated the bug template to route regressions to the new form.
What did NOT change (scope boundary): No runtime code, no CI behavior, and no issue automation workflow changes.

Change Type (select all)

Scope (select all touched areas)

Linked Issue/PR

Closes #
Related #

User-visible / Behavior Changes

GitHub issue intake now includes a dedicated Regression bug report template with [Regression Bug]: title prefix and regression-specific required fields.
The generic Bug report template now explicitly routes regression cases to the regression form.

Security Impact (required)

New permissions/capabilities? (Yes/No): No
Secrets/tokens handling changed? (Yes/No): No
New/changed network calls? (Yes/No): No
Command/tool execution surface changed? (Yes/No): No
Data access scope changed? (Yes/No): No
If any Yes, explain risk + mitigation:

Repro + Verification

Environment

OS: macOS
Runtime/container: local dev shell
Model/provider: N/A
Integration/channel (if any): GitHub Issue Forms
Relevant config (redacted): N/A

Steps

Open GitHub "New issue" for openclaw/openclaw.
Confirm Regression bug report appears in the template picker.
Select it and verify title prefix and required fields render.

Expected

Regression reports are clearly distinguished at intake by title and form structure.

Actual

Matches expected after this change.

Evidence

Attach at least one:

Failing test/log before + passing after
Trace/log snippets
Screenshot/recording
Perf numbers (if relevant)

Human Verification (required)

What you personally verified (not just CI), and how:

Verified scenarios: Parsed issue template YAML locally and verified template content/diff.
Edge cases checked: Regression template includes both last-known-good and first-known-bad required fields.
What you did not verify: Live manual issue submission in GitHub UI.

Compatibility / Migration

Backward compatible? (Yes/No): Yes
Config/env changes? (Yes/No): No
Migration needed? (Yes/No): No
If yes, exact upgrade steps:

Failure Recovery (if this breaks)

How to disable/revert this change quickly: Revert commit restoring previous issue templates.
Files/config to restore: .github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/bug_report.yml, remove .github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/regression_bug_report.yml.
Known bad symptoms reviewers should watch for: Missing template render or invalid issue form YAML.

Risks and Mitigations

List only real risks for this PR. Add/remove entries as needed. If none, write None.

Risk: Regression label auto-apply fails if label is missing in repo.
- Mitigation: Created regression label in repository before opening this PR.

greptile-apps · 2026-02-28T15:49:39Z

Greptile Summary

Added dedicated regression bug template with [Regression Bug]: prefix and regression-specific required fields (last known good version, first bad version, regression window). Updated generic bug template to route regressions to new form.

Issues found:

bug_report.yml placeholder text still contains regression-specific language on lines 17 and 96, contradicting the template's new non-regression purpose

Confidence Score: 3/5

Safe to merge after fixing placeholder text inconsistencies
Template structure is well-designed with proper YAML syntax and appropriate required fields, but placeholder text in bug_report.yml contradicts the non-regression purpose by referencing regression scenarios
bug_report.yml needs placeholder text updates on lines 17 and 96

_{Last reviewed commit: 5ddb5b2}

greptile-apps

_{2 files reviewed, 2 comments}

_{Edit Code Review Agent Settings | Greptile}

greptile-apps · 2026-02-28T15:49:50Z

Additional Comments (2)

.github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/bug_report.yml
placeholder mentions regression behavior ("behavior regressed from "), but this template is now for non-regression bugs

      placeholder: Agent fails to respond to <channel> after <action>.

Prompt To Fix With AI

This is a comment left during a code review.
Path: .github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/bug_report.yml
Line: 17

Comment:
placeholder mentions regression behavior ("behavior regressed from <prior version>"), but this template is now for non-regression bugs

```suggestion
      placeholder: Agent fails to respond to <channel> after <action>.
```

How can I resolve this? If you propose a fix, please make it concise.

.github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/bug_report.yml
placeholder mentions regression ("Regression started after upgrade"), but this template is now for non-regression bugs

      placeholder: Temporary workaround is ...

Prompt To Fix With AI

This is a comment left during a code review.
Path: .github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/bug_report.yml
Line: 96

Comment:
placeholder mentions regression ("Regression started after upgrade"), but this template is now for non-regression bugs

```suggestion
      placeholder: Temporary workaround is ...
```

How can I resolve this? If you propose a fix, please make it concise.

Takhoffman · 2026-02-28T16:03:10Z

PR #29864 - GitHub: add regression bug issue template and routing (#29864)

Merged via squash.

Merge commit: 7ae6831
Verified: pnpm build, pnpm check, pnpm test:macmini
Changes made:
M .github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/bug_report.yml
A .github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/regression_bug_report.yml
Why these changes were made:
Make regressions obvious at issue intake with a dedicated regression template/title prefix and required regression-window fields, while preserving a separate non-regression bug path.
Changelog: CHANGELOG.md updated=false required=false opt_out=true

Thanks @Takhoffman!

@Takhoffman