Decide whether the weekly check still needs the no:project step, now that all three repos auto-add

[ale210]

Overview

We need to decide whether the three "not on the project board" checks stay in §1 of the Weekly Label check (#23), because #174 closed the last route by which a form-created issue could miss board 73 — so the step now passes automatically for new issues, while still being the only thing that catches issues arriving by every other route.

Action Items

• Confirm the current state before deciding. In Perform Weekly Label check #23's body, §1 carries one not on the project board bullet per repo — at lines 24, 32 and 40 as of 2026-08-27, each linking is:issue is:open no:project for its repo. Line numbers drift; find them by the link text "not on the project board".
• Understand why it now passes automatically. Before Fix issue template labels and project board reference devops-security#161 nothing auto-added anywhere (its projects: key used the board title, which GitHub silently ignores). All three repos' blank forms now set projects: ['hackforla/73'], and Add config.yml with blank_issues_enabled: false to all three CoP repos #174 added .github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/config.yml with blank_issues_enabled: false to all three — merged and verified on every default branch 2026-08-26 — which closed the "open a blank issue" escape hatch that was the last remaining leak.
• Understand what it still catches, because this is the argument for keeping it. Three routes still bypass auto-add: (a) issues opened by @danielridgebot, which uses gh issue create --project and therefore depends on secrets.DR_PAT retaining the project token scope — if that scope lapses on a rotation, the board add is exactly what breaks, and the symptom is an issue with correct labels and milestone but no card; (b) anything created with gh issue create without --project, which is how most of our own tickets are made; (c) issues transferred in from another repo.
• Decide between three options, and record the reasoning on this issue before editing anything:
  • Keep the three bullets unchanged.
  • Keep them but reword, so they say what they now catch rather than implying new issues routinely land off-board.
  • Remove them from §1 entirely.
• Recommendation, to accept or overrule: keep and reword. Every failure mode listed above is silent — nothing errors, nothing warns, an issue simply has no card — and a weekly link is cheap. But the current wording dates from when nothing auto-added at all, so it describes a world that no longer exists.
• If rewording, edit Perform Weekly Label check #23's body following the "Editing procedure issues in place" discipline — fetch the body fresh and diff it against the last copy, save a pre-edit backup, patch the specific bullets rather than regenerating the body, and after pushing re-fetch and assert both what you changed and that §2, the conformance links and the Filter changes prompt are untouched.
• After the edit, run all three links once and confirm each returns what the new wording claims. If any returns a real result, add those issues to board 73 — that is the step doing its job, and it is worth noting in that week's comment.

Resources/Instructions

• The issue to edit: Perform Weekly Label check #23 "Perform Weekly Label check". Its body is a template that a lead copies into a new comment each week — edit the template in the body, never a past comment.
• Coordination with Drop is:open from the conformance filters in the Weekly Label check #188. That ticket also edits §1 of Perform Weekly Label check #23, dropping is:open from the conformance filters, and it explicitly excludes these three no:project links from its scope (stripping is:open from them would return every closed issue ever opened in the three repos). The two edits do not overlap textually, but both rewrite the same section — whoever goes second must re-fetch Perform Weekly Label check #23's body before patching rather than working from a stale copy.
• Background on why this became decidable now: Add config.yml with blank_issues_enabled: false to all three CoP repos #174 landing was the stated unblock condition for revisiting this step.
• The three filters cover devops, devops-security and incubator. Board 73 spans five repos — ghpages-docker and docker-mkdocs each have an item on it — so these three links do not cover the whole board. Worth mentioning in the rewording, but adding two more repos is not in scope here.

[Amiirhosseini]

Hi — I'd like to take this issue.

Plan:

1. Confirm current state of §1 no:project bullets in Perform Weekly Label check #23 (lines drift — will search by link text).
2. Recommend keep + reword per the issue's reasoning (catches bot/PAT failures, manual gh issue create, transfers).
3. Edit Perform Weekly Label check #23 body in-place per the editing discipline (backup, diff, verify §2 untouched).
4. Coordinate with Drop is:open from the conformance filters in the Weekly Label check #188 since both touch §1 — will re-fetch body before patching.

Please assign this to me if available.