Skip to content

@W-23559528 Add #GUSINFO to CODEOWNERS (OSPO compliance) - #1664

Merged
xinyaochen-sudo merged 2 commits into
forcedotcom:masterfrom
xinyaochen-sudo:t/eapi-bulk/codeowners-gusinfo-w-23559528
Jul 27, 2026
Merged

@W-23559528 Add #GUSINFO to CODEOWNERS (OSPO compliance)#1664
xinyaochen-sudo merged 2 commits into
forcedotcom:masterfrom
xinyaochen-sudo:t/eapi-bulk/codeowners-gusinfo-w-23559528

Conversation

@xinyaochen-sudo

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

What

Adds the required #GUSINFO line to the repo's CODEOWNERS file:

#GUSINFO:Enterprise API - Bulk,Data Loader

Why

Per the OSPO (Open Source Program Office) FY27 V2MOM compliance check, the CODEOWNERS file for forcedotcom/dataloader was missing a valid GUS Scrum Team and GUS Product Tag. Every Salesforce OSS repo must declare which GUS Team owns the codebase via a #GUSINFO:<Scrum Team>,<Product Tag> line.

Both values point to active GUS records owned by our team:

  • Scrum Team: Enterprise API - Bulk
  • Product Tag: Data Loader

Format follows the oss-template CODEOWNERS — the line is left-aligned and sits directly below the #ECCN comment.

Work item

W-23559528

…Loader)

OSPO FY27 compliance: CODEOWNERS was missing a valid GUS Scrum Team and
Product Tag. Add the #GUSINFO line per the oss-template format, pointing
to our own active GUS info.

  #GUSINFO:Enterprise API - Bulk,Data Loader
@xinyaochen-sudo xinyaochen-sudo changed the title Add #GUSINFO to CODEOWNERS (OSPO compliance) [W-23559528] @W-23559528 Add #GUSINFO to CODEOWNERS (OSPO compliance) Jul 27, 2026
Matches the internal gitsoma fix (commit 0d4362a): a bare '*' ownership
line satisfies the CODEOWNERS format check without assigning a required
reviewer team, and places #GUSINFO immediately above the ownership line
per the oss-template convention.
@xinyaochen-sudo
xinyaochen-sudo merged commit f79c9f7 into forcedotcom:master Jul 27, 2026
18 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants