# Platform owners

Seven builds are compiled from one source tree. One person maintains all seven
and can only actually run two of them.

That is not a staffing complaint, it is the root cause of a specific class of
bug in this repo. Five separate audit findings (B3, B19, B20, S15, S23) were the
same defect: a build that compiled cleanly, shipped, and was broken in a way
only someone who used that platform daily would ever notice. One of them cited a
reference path that did not exist in its own build and survived because the
other four copies were correct.

So platform ownership is open. A platform owner is the person who would notice.

## The builds

<!-- owners:start -->
| Platform | Owner | Previously contributed |
|---|---|---|
| agent-skills | unclaimed | |
| claude-code | [@born-in-autumn](https://github.com/born-in-autumn) | [@MPZ-00](https://github.com/MPZ-00) |
| codex-cli | [@Palo-Alto-AI-Research-Lab](https://github.com/Palo-Alto-AI-Research-Lab) | [@Litash](https://github.com/Litash), [@MPZ-00](https://github.com/MPZ-00) |
| gemini-cli | unclaimed | [@MPZ-00](https://github.com/MPZ-00) |
| hermes | unclaimed | [@Litash](https://github.com/Litash) |
| opencode | unclaimed | [@Litash](https://github.com/Litash), [@MPZ-00](https://github.com/MPZ-00) |
| pi | unclaimed | |
<!-- owners:end -->

"Previously contributed" is credit for work already merged, taken from the git
history. It is not an assignment and implies no obligation. Anyone in that
column is welcome to claim the platform, and equally welcome not to.

Unclaimed platforms are maintained by the repo maintainer, who in most cases
cannot test them.

## What an owner does

- Runs the build on the real platform when something changes, and says whether
  it works. That is the part nobody else can do.
- Reviews PRs touching `adapters/<platform>/`. Not a veto over the rest of the
  repo, and not a duty to review anything else.
- Reports when the platform's own conventions move. These are moving targets;
  a directory layout or a manifest field changes and the build is quietly wrong
  until someone who uses it notices.

## What an owner does not have to do

- Write Python. Most adapters are shell that assembles markdown.
- Answer support questions, respond within any timeframe, or be reachable.
- Keep doing it. Say so and the row goes back to unclaimed. No explanation
  needed, nothing breaks.

## Why a PR can land without the maintainer testing your platform

Because CI checks the parts that do not need the platform installed. Every push
compiles all seven builds and verifies four things per build: it emits a
non-empty tree, its script root resolves, every reference path it cites exists
inside that same build, and a runnable Python project ships beside the scripts.
The board is in the [README](../README.md#platform-conformance) and is
regenerated by `scripts/conformance_report.py --check`, which fails the build on
drift.

That covers the failure mode that produced those five findings. It does not
cover "does this actually behave correctly inside the tool", which is exactly
the gap an owner fills.

## Claiming one

Comment on [issue #171](https://github.com/eugeniughelbur/obsidian-second-brain/issues/171)
saying which one, or open a PR editing the table above with your handle in the
Owner column. Either is fine; the PR is
faster.

There is no interview and no track record required. Using the platform is the
qualification.

## Credit

An owner's handle is emitted into that platform's generated `INSTALL.md`, so the
credit ships inside the artifact rather than living only in a table here.