[legend91019]

Summary

Fixes #462.

Adds GitHub Issue Forms under .github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/ to standardize bug reports and feature requests, ensuring reporters provide actionable environment and reproduction details upfront. Blank issues remain available for documentation issues and other problems that do not fit either form.

Changes

1. bug_report.yml:
   • Prerequisites checklist: confirms duplicate search and sensitive-data redaction.
   • Structured environment fields: BrowserSkill version / commit, operating system dropdown, architecture / build, installation method, browser and extension versions.
   • Actionable reproduction fields: exact command / API call (shell highlighted), reproduction steps, expected behavior, actual behavior, sanitized logs / diagnostic output, and regression detection.
2. feature_request.yml:
   • Problem or use case description (ensuring focus on user needs rather than solely implementation).
   • Proposed behavior and solution design.
   • Alternatives considered and workarounds.
   • Affected CLI / API surface.
   • Backward-compatibility considerations.
3. config.yml:
   • blank_issues_enabled: true so contributors can still file documentation issues or other problems that do not fit either form.

Validation

• Verified YAML syntax of bug_report.yml, feature_request.yml, and config.yml with Python yaml.safe_load().
• All acceptance criteria in [Process] Add structured issue forms for bug reports and feature requests #462 addressed.

[NianJiuZst]

Thanks for adding these forms. I think they will reduce the back-and-forth needed to reproduce bugs and help feature requests explain the underlying user problem. Keeping logs, the affected CLI/API surface, and compatibility considerations optional is a good choice.

Before merging, please make these small changes:

1. In .github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/config.yml, remove the private vulnerability reporting and Discussions contact links. Both features are currently disabled for this repository, and the Discussions URL returns 404. We do not need either channel for now.
2. In .github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/bug_report.yml, remove the required security-vulnerability checkbox and its Security Advisories link. Keep the duplicate-search and sensitive-data redaction checks.
3. Set blank_issues_enabled: true so contributors can still report documentation issues or other problems that do not fit either form.
4. Update the PR description to reflect this scope: remove the claims about private security reporting and Discussions, and mention that blank issues remain available.

I checked the complete diff and parsed all three YAML files successfully. I have not exercised GitHub's actual form submission flow.

Please also confirm that Allow edits and access to secrets by maintainers is checked and keep it enabled so maintainers with write access can update the PR branch. GitHub currently reports maintainer_can_modify: true, so this appears to be enabled already.

[legend91019]

Thanks for the careful review! All four points are addressed in 5bdc892:

1. config.yml: removed both contact links (private vulnerability reporting and Discussions) — neither channel is enabled for this repository, so nothing points at them now.
2. bug_report.yml: removed the required security-vulnerability checkbox and its Security Advisories link. The duplicate-search and sensitive-data redaction checks remain required.
3. blank_issues_enabled: true is now set, so documentation issues and other problems that do not fit either form still have a path.
4. PR description updated to match this scope: no more claims about private security reporting or Discussions, and it now states that blank issues remain available.

Allow edits and access to secrets by maintainers is checked and will stay enabled (maintainer_can_modify: true on the PR).

All three YAML files re-parse cleanly with yaml.safe_load().

CI update (2026-10-24): all 10 CI jobs are green on decbaa9, including Browser video recording regression (run 40050785100). For context: that job is flaky on this repository — it failed on 3 earlier attempts today with pixel-seek assertion mismatches (two different test cases: capture.browser.test.ts expected 0 to be greater than 240, and encoder.browser.test.ts expected 254 to be less than 15), and the same job has also failed on main itself (e.g. runs 39887844017, 39753921903) while passing on others (39991354990). The branch is also merged onto current main (daa7904) so the PR diff remains just the three .github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/ files.

[legend91019]

Closed and reopened to retrigger CI: the Browser video recording regression job is flaky (pixel-seek assertions) and unrelated to this YAML-only diff. Update below: the retriggered run went green.