[Pigbibi]

Problem

The three twin governance repositories drifted. This repository was missing the reviewer configuration that QuantStrategyLab/.github carries, its README pointed at a docs/private-repositories.md that does not exist here, it still tracked a Python bytecode cache, and no repository declared or verified a shared revision.

Changes

• Replace pr-governance/ with the shared revision: reviewer configuration in main.cjs, test-main.cjs and templates/risk-gate.yml, plus one README text for all three organizations.
• Remove the tracked pr-governance/scripts/__pycache__/secret_scan.cpython-313.pyc.
• Add VERSION (3, the policy revision).
• Add pr-governance/scripts/check-twin-drift.sh and .github/workflows/governance-drift.yml: weekly and on demand, they compare pr-governance/ and VERSION across Pigbibi/governance, GdeiAssistant/.github and QuantStrategyLab/.github.

The matching change is open in Pigbibi/governance#10 and QuantStrategyLab/.github; the drift workflow reports success once all three merge.

Validation

• node --test pr-governance/scripts/test-*.cjs — 164 tests pass.
• git ls-files pr-governance | grep __pycache__ returns nothing after this change.
• sh pr-governance/scripts/check-twin-drift.sh after the sibling merges.

Risk and compatibility

The drift workflow is advisory (weekly schedule and manual dispatch); it does not gate pull requests. No gate behavior changes: the scripts are byte-identical to the QuantStrategyLab copy that already runs in production.

AI assistance

• Tool: Qoder

What changed

This repository now runs the same reviewed governance engine as the other two organizations and can prove it has not drifted.

[Pigbibi]

@codex review

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

Codex Review Summary: ❌ Failed

This comment shows the latest Codex review activity on this pull request.

Review	Status	Commit	Review trigger
📝 Code Review	✅ Completed 2026-11-07T19:53:30.248982Z	3e15865	Manual request
🔒 Security Review	❌ Failed 2026-11-07T19:52:38.491243Z We couldn’t complete this review. Comment @codex security review to try again.	3e15865	Manual request

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

• Open a pull request for review
• Mark a draft as ready
• Comment "@codex review" or "@codex security review".

Codex reacts with 👀 while any review is running, comments if it has suggestions, and reacts with 👍 once all reviews finish with no findings.

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

The account paying for this security review has reached its Codex usage limits. The payer can check the Codex usage dashboard. For personal accounts, using credits requires enabling “Use credits for security reviews” in Code review settings. If you do not manage the paying account, contact this repository's admins.

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

The account paying for this security review has reached its Codex usage limits. The payer can check the Codex usage dashboard. For personal accounts, using credits requires enabling “Use credits for security reviews” in Code review settings. If you do not manage the paying account, contact this repository's admins.

[Pigbibi]

@codex review

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

The account paying for this security review has reached its Codex usage limits. The payer can check the Codex usage dashboard. For personal accounts, using credits requires enabling “Use credits for security reviews” in Code review settings. If you do not manage the paying account, contact this repository's admins.

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

Codex Review: Didn't find any major issues. What shall we delve into next?

Reviewed commit: 3e15865aee

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

• Open a pull request for review
• Mark a draft as ready
• Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".