chore: automation improvements

.github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/tracking-issue.md

@@ -27,7 +27,7 @@ Short description of the proposed feature.
 - [ ] Kick off meeting
 - [ ] RFC pull request submitted (label: `status/review`)
 - [ ] Community reach out (via Slack and/or Twitter)
-- [ ] API signed-off (label `api-approved` applied to pull request)
+- [ ] API signed-off (label `status/api-approved` applied to pull request)
 - [ ] Final comments period (label: `status/final-comments-period`)
 - [ ] Approved and merged (label: `status/approved`)
 - [ ] Execution plan submitted (label: `status/planning`)

.github/workflows/render-table.yml

@@ -27,7 +27,7 @@ jobs:
       - name: install dependencies
         run: |
           cd tools/rfc-render
-          npm install
+          npm ci
       - name: render table
         run: |
           node tools/rfc-render/inject-table.js README.md

.mergify.yml

@@ -36,6 +36,10 @@ pull_request_rules:
       - "#commented-reviews-by=0"
   - name: remove stale reviews
     actions:
-      dismiss_reviews: {}
+        approved: true
+        changes_requested: true
     conditions:
-      - base=master
+      - author!=github-actions[bot]
+      - base=main
+      - -merged
+      - -closed

0000-template.md

@@ -38,7 +38,7 @@
 ---
 
 Ticking the box below indicates that the public API of this RFC has been
-signed-off by the API bar raiser (the `api-approved` label was applied to the
+signed-off by the API bar raiser (the `status/api-approved` label was applied to the
 RFC pull request):
 
 ```

README.md

@@ -360,7 +360,7 @@ Before you can merge your RFC, you will need the API Bar Raiser to sign-off on
 the public API of your feature. This is will normally be described under the
 **Working Backwards** section of your RFC.
 
-To sign-off, the API bar raiser will add the **api-approved** label to the RFC
+To sign-off, the API bar raiser will add the **status/api-approved** label to the RFC
 pull request.
 
 Once the API was signed-off, update your RFC document and add a `[x]` the
@@ -419,7 +419,7 @@ digraph states {
     review [label = "In Review"];
     fcp [label = "Final Comment Period"];
     approved [label = "Approved"];
-    plannning [label = "Planning"];
+    planning [label = "Planning"];
     implementing [label = "Implementing"];
     done [label = "Done"];
     rejected [label = "Rejected"];
@@ -432,8 +432,8 @@ digraph states {
     fcp -> review [label = "revision requested"];
     fcp -> approved [label = "pull request approved and merged"];
     fcp -> rejected [label = "rfc rejected"];
-    approved -> plannning [label = "pull request with implementation plan created"];
-    plannning -> implementing [label = "rfc with implementation plan approved and merged"];
+    approved -> planning [label = "pull request with implementation plan created"];
+    planning -> implementing [label = "rfc with implementation plan approved and merged"];
     implementing -> done [label = "implementation completed"];
 }
 -->
@@ -449,12 +449,14 @@ digraph states {
 4. **Approved** - The RFC PR is approved and merged to `master`, and the RFC is now
    ready to be implemented.
 5. **Planning** - A PR is created with the **Implementation Plan** section of the RFC.
-6. **Implementing** - Implemetation plan is approved and merged and the RFC is actively
+6. **Implementing** - Implementation plan is approved and merged and the RFC is actively
    being implemented.
 7. **Done** - Implementation is complete and merged across appropriate
    repositories.
 8. **Rejected** - During the review period, the RFC may be rejected and then it will
    be marked as such.
+9. **Stale** - The RFC did not get any significant enough progress or tracking and has become stale.
+   We welcome a re-submission with substantial enough changes to overcome the original issues.
 
 ---
 

text/00110-cli-framework-compatibility-strategy.md

@@ -79,7 +79,7 @@ introducing breaking changes (cx-protocol version bump), are not very good:
   manifest upgrade. This is also something we need to **remember**.
 
 There are also some quirky implementation details, in
-[`versioning.ts`](https://github.com/aws/aws-cdk/blob/master/packages/@aws-cdk/cx-api/lib/versioning.ts):
+[`versioning.ts`](https://github.com/aws/aws-cdk/blob/main/packages/@aws-cdk/cx-api/lib/versioning.ts):
 
 ```typescript
 const toolkitVersion = parseSemver(CLOUD_ASSEMBLY_VERSION);
@@ -107,7 +107,7 @@ if (semver.lt(frameworkVersion, toolkitVersion)) {
 This code (and comments) is contradictory to our current compatibility model,
 where we actually attempt to support two way compatibility. To facilitate this,
 we added the
-[`upgradeAssemblyManifest`](https://github.com/aws/aws-cdk/blob/master/packages/@aws-cdk/cx-api/lib/versioning.ts#L60)
+[`upgradeAssemblyManifest`](https://github.com/aws/aws-cdk/blob/main/packages/@aws-cdk/cx-api/lib/versioning.ts#L60)
 function.
 
 Thats not to say that what we currently have can't work. But the fact that we
@@ -364,10 +364,10 @@ used to create it.
 
 To actually validate this behavior, we add a unit test for the `exec.ts` file.
 
-### Step 3: Remove [`versioning.ts`](https://github.com/aws/aws-cdk/blob/master/packages/@aws-cdk/cx-api/lib/versioning.ts)
+### Step 3: Remove [`versioning.ts`](https://github.com/aws/aws-cdk/blob/main/packages/@aws-cdk/cx-api/lib/versioning.ts)
 
 Given all the above steps, we don't need the functionality provided by
-[`versioning.ts`](https://github.com/aws/aws-cdk/blob/master/packages/@aws-cdk/cx-api/lib/versioning.ts).
+[`versioning.ts`](https://github.com/aws/aws-cdk/blob/main/packages/@aws-cdk/cx-api/lib/versioning.ts).
 Lets dive deep into why is that exactly.
 
 #### Schema Evolution
@@ -386,7 +386,7 @@ This enables the CLI to essentially not be aware of any schema version expect
 for the last one.
 
 This is done in the
-[`upgradeAssemblyManifest`](https://github.com/aws/aws-cdk/blob/master/packages/@aws-cdk/cx-api/lib/versioning.ts#L60)
+[`upgradeAssemblyManifest`](https://github.com/aws/aws-cdk/blob/main/packages/@aws-cdk/cx-api/lib/versioning.ts#L60)
 function.
 
 We stipulate that this is no longer needed. The compatibility checks will make
@@ -411,7 +411,7 @@ This brings us to the next item.
 #### Compatibility Validation
 
 This is done in the
-[`verifyManifestVersion`](https://github.com/aws/aws-cdk/blob/master/packages/@aws-cdk/cx-api/lib/versioning.ts#L39)
+[`verifyManifestVersion`](https://github.com/aws/aws-cdk/blob/main/packages/@aws-cdk/cx-api/lib/versioning.ts#L39)
 function, and contains two validations:
 
 1. **Framework cannot be bigger than CLI.**
@@ -517,7 +517,7 @@ This is a concrete example on how things can break when we introduce changes to
 the _cx-api_.
 
 1. Rename `target` in
-   [`ContainerImageAssetMetadataEntry`](https://github.com/aws/aws-cdk/blob/master/packages/@aws-cdk/cx-api/lib/assets.ts#L74)
+   [`ContainerImageAssetMetadataEntry`](https://github.com/aws/aws-cdk/blob/main/packages/@aws-cdk/cx-api/lib/assets.ts#L74)
    to `buildTarget`.
 2. Perform necessary changes in CLI and fix all relevant tests.
 

text/0039-reduce-module-size.md

@@ -75,7 +75,7 @@ Repeat the same for `lambda-layer-kubectl`, and `lambda-layer-node-proxy-agent`.
 ---
 
 Ticking the box below indicates that the public API of this RFC has been
-signed-off by the API bar raiser (the `api-approved` label was applied to the
+signed-off by the API bar raiser (the `status/api-approved` label was applied to the
 RFC pull request):
 
 - [x] Signed-off by API Bar Raiser

text/0049-continuous-delivery.md

@@ -118,7 +118,7 @@ bootstrap => source => build => synthesis => mutate => publish => deploy
 3. **build + synthesis**: compiles the CDK app code into an executable program
    (user-defined) and invokes the compiled executable through `cdk synth` to
    produce a
-   [cloud assembly](https://github.com/aws/aws-cdk/blob/master/design/cloud-assembly.md)
+   [cloud assembly](https://github.com/aws/aws-cdk/blob/main/design/cloud-assembly.md)
    from the app. The cloud assembly includes a CloudFormation template for each
    stack and asset sources (docker images, s3 files, etc) that must be packaged
    and published to the asset store in each environment that consumes them.

text/0052-resource-importing-support.md

@@ -119,7 +119,7 @@ error, propagates it back to the user.
 ---
 
 Ticking the box below indicates that the public API of this RFC has been
-signed-off by the API bar raiser (the `api-approved` label was applied to the
+signed-off by the API bar raiser (the `status/api-approved` label was applied to the
 RFC pull request):
 
 ```

text/0055-feature-flags.md

@@ -182,14 +182,14 @@ contribution guide and will involve the following steps:
    - If the feature is being tracked in a single issue without an RFC, approval
      should be indicated in this issue.
 2. Define a new const under
-   [cx-api/lib/features.ts](https://github.com/aws/aws-cdk/blob/master/packages/%40aws-cdk/cx-api/lib/features.ts)
+   [cx-api/lib/features.ts](https://github.com/aws/aws-cdk/blob/main/packages/%40aws-cdk/cx-api/lib/features.ts)
    with the name of the context key that **enables** this new feature (for
    example, `ENABLE_STACK_NAME_DUPLICATES`). The context key should be in the
    form `module.Type:feature` (e.g. `@aws-cdk/core:enableStackNameDuplicates`).
 3. Use `node.tryGetContext(cxapi.ENABLE_XXX)` to check if this feature is
    enabled in your code. If it is not defined, revert to the legacy behavior.
 4. Add your feature flag to
-   [cx-api/lib/future.ts](https://github.com/aws/aws-cdk/blob/master/packages/%40aws-cdk/cx-api/lib/future.ts).
+   [cx-api/lib/future.ts](https://github.com/aws/aws-cdk/blob/main/packages/%40aws-cdk/cx-api/lib/future.ts).
    This map is inserted to generated `cdk.json` files for new projects created
    through `cdk init`.
 5. In your PR title (which goes into CHANGELOG), add a `(behind feature flag)`

text/0063-precreated-roles.md

@@ -109,7 +109,7 @@ single role has all the required permissions.
 ---
 
 Ticking the box below indicates that the public API of this RFC has been
-signed-off by the API bar raiser (the `api-approved` label was applied to the
+signed-off by the API bar raiser (the `status/api-approved` label was applied to the
 RFC pull request):
 
 ```

text/0079-cdk-2.0.md

@@ -253,8 +253,8 @@ There are some packages that both the CLI and the framework depend on:
 This means we cannot move these packages under `aws-cdk-lib`, as they need to consumable by the CLI.
 The simplest approach would be to keep publishing them as is, and have the framework and CLI continue to declare a dependency on them.
 
-However, since [@aws-cdk/cx-api](https://github.com/aws/aws-cdk/blob/master/packages/@aws-cdk/core/lib/stage.ts#L186)
-and [@aws-cdk/cloud-assembly-schema](https://github.com/aws/aws-cdk/blob/master/packages/@aws-cdk/aws-elasticloadbalancingv2/lib/shared/base-load-balancer.ts#L99)
+However, since [@aws-cdk/cx-api](https://github.com/aws/aws-cdk/blob/main/packages/@aws-cdk/core/lib/stage.ts#L186)
+and [@aws-cdk/cloud-assembly-schema](https://github.com/aws/aws-cdk/blob/main/packages/@aws-cdk/aws-elasticloadbalancingv2/lib/shared/base-load-balancer.ts#L99)
 are exposed in the public API of `aws-cdk-lib`, this would require `aws-cdk-lib` to take a `peerDependency` on them, which we cannot afford.
 
 The approach we take here is as follows:

text/0095-cognito-construct-library/working-backwards-readme.md

@@ -321,7 +321,7 @@ to read more about user pool workflows using lambda triggers, and details around
 each trigger.
 
 Check out the
-[documentation](https://github.com/aws/aws-cdk/blob/master/packages/%40aws-cdk/aws-cognito/lib/user-pool.ts#L148)
+[documentation](https://github.com/aws/aws-cdk/blob/main/packages/%40aws-cdk/aws-cognito/lib/user-pool.ts#L148)
 to find the list of triggers supported by the CDK.
 
 Code sample:

text/0192-remove-constructs-compat.md

@@ -450,7 +450,7 @@ on the `constructs` library.
 See the RFC for [monolithic packaging] for more details.
 
 [monolithic packaging]:
-  https://github.com/aws/aws-cdk-rfcs/blob/master/text/0006-monolothic-packaging.md
+  https://github.com/aws/aws-cdk-rfcs/blob/main/text/0006-monolothic-packaging.md
 
 ## Design
 
@@ -798,7 +798,7 @@ The prepare hook was used in the CDK in a few cases:
 
 The first two use cases have already been addressed by centralizing the
 "prepare" logic at the stage level (into
-[prepare-app.ts](https://github.com/aws/aws-cdk/blob/master/packages/%40aws-cdk/core/lib/private/prepare-app.ts)).
+[prepare-app.ts](https://github.com/aws/aws-cdk/blob/main/packages/%40aws-cdk/core/lib/private/prepare-app.ts)).
 
 #### What can we do on 1.x for 06-NO-PREPARE
 
@@ -818,7 +818,7 @@ The reason this is not available at the base class is because the abstraction
 did not "hold water" as the AWS CDK evolved and new CDKs emerged. In the AWS
 CDK, we eventually ended up with a centralized synthesis logic at the
 `Stage`-level
-([synthesis.ts](https://github.com/aws/aws-cdk/blob/master/packages/%40aws-cdk/core/lib/private/synthesis.ts)).
+([synthesis.ts](https://github.com/aws/aws-cdk/blob/main/packages/%40aws-cdk/core/lib/private/synthesis.ts)).
 The main reason was that we needed to "break" the recursion in various
 domain-specific points (e.g. stages, nested stacks) which meant that the generic
 logic of "traverse the entire tree and call `synthesize`" did not hold. In
@@ -1089,7 +1089,7 @@ for constructs 10.x.
   - [x] Change `addDependency` to accept `IDependable` instead of `IConstruct`.
   - [x] Return only local dependencies in `node.dependencies`
   - [ ] Migrate
-        [DependencyGraph](https://github.com/awslabs/cdk8s/blob/master/packages/cdk8s/src/dependency.ts)
+        [DependencyGraph](https://github.com/awslabs/cdk8s/blob/main/packages/cdk8s/src/dependency.ts)
         from cdk8s into `constructs`.
 - [04-STACK-ROOT](#04-stack-root)
   - N/A

text/0249-v2-experiments.expired.md

@@ -7,7 +7,7 @@ rfc pr: https://github.com/aws/aws-cdk-rfcs/pull/250
 # Summary
 
 **⚠️ NOTE:** This RFC is expired and has been superceded by
-<https://github.com/aws/aws-cdk-rfcs/blob/master/text/0249-v2-experiments.md>.
+<https://github.com/aws/aws-cdk-rfcs/blob/main/text/0249-v2-experiments.md>.
 This document is retained for historical context.
 
 ---

text/0249-v2-experiments.md

@@ -361,5 +361,5 @@ These are the goals of this RFC, in order from most to least important:
 ### Appendix B: Previous RFC
 
 This is the second version of this RFC. A previous version was reviewed and approved, and can be found here:
-<https://github.com/aws/aws-cdk-rfcs/blob/master/text/0249-v2-experiments.expired.md>.
+<https://github.com/aws/aws-cdk-rfcs/blob/main/text/0249-v2-experiments.expired.md>.
 The original version is more implementation- and trade-off focused, whereas this RFC focused on the working-backwards artifacts.

text/0253-cdk-metadata-v2.md

@@ -138,7 +138,7 @@ constructs, authored and vended by AWS.
 We decided against an open system, instead preferring to have a specific
 allow-list of packages (or package prefixes) we are going to report on. For
 example, the current list looks like this and can be found
-[here](https://github.com/aws/aws-cdk/blob/master/packages/@aws-cdk/core/lib/private/runtime-info.ts):
+[here](https://github.com/aws/aws-cdk/blob/main/packages/@aws-cdk/core/lib/private/runtime-info.ts):
 
 ```ts
 const ALLOWLIST_SCOPES = ['@aws-cdk', '@aws-solutions-konstruk', '@aws-solutions-constructs', '@amzn'];

text/0264-registry-schema-codegen.md

@@ -202,11 +202,11 @@ it.
 
 For example, useful information we can get from cfn-lint:
 
-* [OnlyOne](https://github.com/aws-cloudformation/cfn-python-lint/blob/master/src/cfnlint/data/AdditionalSpecs/OnlyOne.json),
+* [OnlyOne](https://github.com/aws-cloudformation/cfn-python-lint/blob/main/src/cfnlint/data/AdditionalSpecs/OnlyOne.json),
   mutually exclusive properties in a structure.
-* [Inclusive](https://github.com/aws-cloudformation/cfn-python-lint/blob/master/src/cfnlint/data/AdditionalSpecs/Inclusive.json),
+* [Inclusive](https://github.com/aws-cloudformation/cfn-python-lint/blob/main/src/cfnlint/data/AdditionalSpecs/Inclusive.json),
   a set of property dependencies.
-* [Exclusive](https://github.com/aws-cloudformation/cfn-python-lint/blob/master/src/cfnlint/data/AdditionalSpecs/Exclusive.json),
+* [Exclusive](https://github.com/aws-cloudformation/cfn-python-lint/blob/main/src/cfnlint/data/AdditionalSpecs/Exclusive.json),
   properties that preclude each other.
 
 Etc.

text/0328-polyglot-assert.md

@@ -232,9 +232,9 @@ import { assertions } from 'aws-cdk-lib';
 ```
 
 Read more about `aws-cdk-lib` at
-<https://github.com/aws/aws-cdk/tree/master/packages/aws-cdk-lib#readme> and about the
+<https://github.com/aws/aws-cdk/tree/main/packages/aws-cdk-lib#readme> and about the
 CDK module lifecycle at
-<https://github.com/aws/aws-cdk-rfcs/blob/master/text/0107-construct-library-module-lifecycle.md>.
+<https://github.com/aws/aws-cdk-rfcs/blob/main/text/0107-construct-library-module-lifecycle.md>.
 
 ## Internal FAQ
 

text/0340-firehose-l2.md

@@ -655,7 +655,7 @@ For non-AWS service destinations, use `HttpDestination`.
 ---
 
 Ticking the box below indicates that the public API of this RFC has been
-signed-off by the API bar raiser (the `api-approved` label was applied to the
+signed-off by the API bar raiser (the `status/api-approved` label was applied to the
 RFC pull request):
 
 - [X] Signed-off by API Bar Raiser @rix0rrr

text/0431-sagemaker-l2-endpoint.md

@@ -275,7 +275,7 @@ productionVariant.metricModelLatency().createAlarm(this, 'ModelLatencyAlarm', {
 ---
 
 Ticking the box below indicates that the public API of this RFC has been
-signed-off by the API bar raiser (the `api-approved` label was applied to the
+signed-off by the API bar raiser (the `status/api-approved` label was applied to the
 RFC pull request):
 
 ```

text/0436-gamelift-l2.md

@@ -953,7 +953,7 @@ in the *Amazon GameLift FleetIQ Developer Guide*.
 ---
 
 Ticking the box below indicates that the public API of this RFC has been
-signed-off by the API bar raiser (the `api-approved` label was applied to the
+signed-off by the API bar raiser (the `status/api-approved` label was applied to the
 RFC pull request):
 
 ```

text/0456-elasticache-l2.md

@@ -187,7 +187,7 @@ See the documentation on `SecretValue` for more details.
 ---
 
 Ticking the box below indicates that the public API of this RFC has been
-signed-off by the API bar raiser (the `api-approved` label was applied to the
+signed-off by the API bar raiser (the `status/api-approved` label was applied to the
 RFC pull request):
 
 - [ ] Signed-off by API Bar Raiser @corymhall

text/0474-event-bridge-scheduler-l2.md

@@ -409,7 +409,7 @@ in the *AWS Event Bridge Scheduler User Guide*.
 ---
 
 Ticking the box below indicates that the public API of this RFC has been
-signed-off by the API bar raiser (the `api-approved` label was applied to the
+signed-off by the API bar raiser (the `status/api-approved` label was applied to the
 RFC pull request):
 
 ```

text/0477-policy-validation.md

@@ -413,7 +413,7 @@ export class CfnGuardValidator implements IPolicyValidationPlugin {
 ```
 
 Ticking the box below indicates that the public API of this RFC has been
-signed-off by the API bar raiser (the `api-approved` label was applied to the
+signed-off by the API bar raiser (the `status/api-approved` label was applied to the
 RFC pull request):
 
 ```text

text/0499-appconfig-constructs.md

@@ -299,7 +299,7 @@ such as `onDeploymentComplete(EventDestination)`.
 ---
 
 Ticking the box below indicates that the public API of this RFC has been
-signed-off by the API bar raiser (the `api-approved` label was applied to the
+signed-off by the API bar raiser (the `status/api-approved` label was applied to the
 RFC pull request):
 
 ```

text/0507-subnets.md

@@ -322,7 +322,7 @@ const lb = new elbv2.ApplicationLoadBalancer(this, 'LB', {
 ---
 
 Ticking the box below indicates that the public API of this RFC has been
-signed-off by the API bar raiser (the `api-approved` label was applied to the
+signed-off by the API bar raiser (the `status/api-approved` label was applied to the
 RFC pull request):
 
 ```

text/0510-dynamodb-global-table.md

@@ -467,7 +467,7 @@ GlobalTable.fromTableName(stack, 'FooTableId', 'FooTable');
 ---
 
 Ticking the box below indicates that the public API of this RFC has been
-signed-off by the API bar raiser (the `api-approved` label was applied to the
+signed-off by the API bar raiser (the `status/api-approved` label was applied to the
 RFC pull request):
 
 ```