Develop to Prod: Increase Diff Granularity

.env.example

@@ -1 +1,4 @@
+# Optional. fetch_bills.py downloads from keyless govinfo bulk data by default;
+# a Congress.gov API key is only needed for `--source api` or `download-all`
+# year-range discovery. Get a free key at https://api.congress.gov/sign-up/
 CONGRESS_API_KEY=your_key_here

.gitattributes

@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
-# Generated rendered diffs — regenerate via `uv run python render_examples.py`.
+# Generated rendered diffs — regenerate via `uv run python scripts/render_examples.py`.
 # linguist-generated hides them from GitHub diff views by default and excludes
 # them from language stats.
 examples/*.html linguist-generated=true

.github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/bug_report.md

@@ -1,23 +1,27 @@
 ---
 name: Bug report
 about: Something isn't working as expected
-labels: bug
+type: Bug
 ---
 
 **What happened?**
-A clear description of the bug.
+A clear description of what went wrong.
 
-**What did you expect?**
-What should have happened instead.
+**What did you expect instead?**
 
-**Steps to reproduce**
-1. Bill and versions compared (e.g., 118 hr 4366, v1 vs v6)
-2. Command you ran
-3. Any relevant flags (--financial, --filter, etc.)
+**How can we reproduce it?**
+Whatever you can give us helps:
+- Which bill and which two versions you were comparing (e.g. 118 hr 4366, "reported in house" vs "engrossed")
+- If you used the **website**: what you clicked, typed, or uploaded
+- If you used the **command line**: the command and any flags (`--financial`, `--filter`, …)
 
-**Error output**
-Paste any error messages or unexpected output.
+**Anything else?**
+Screenshots, error messages, or anything that looked off.
 
-**Environment**
-- OS:
-- Python version:
+**How are you using DeltaTrack?** (optional)
+- [ ] The website
+- [ ] Installed on my own computer — if so, your OS (and Python version, if you know it)
+
+<!-- That's all we need to get started. The team adds acceptance criteria,
+     scope, and a pointer to where to start when the issue is groomed for pickup
+     (see "Grooming an issue for pickup" in CONTRIBUTING.md). -->

.github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/config.yml

@@ -0,0 +1,8 @@
+blank_issues_enabled: true
+contact_links:
+  - name: Questions / where to start
+    url: https://civictechdc.slack.com/archives/C0AT13U25V2
+    about: Ask in the #congressional-tech Slack channel, or come to the biweekly meetup.
+  - name: Biweekly meetup (Civic Tech DC)
+    url: https://luma.com/civic-tech-dc
+    about: The fastest way to get oriented and pick up a first issue alongside someone.

.github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/feature_request.md

@@ -1,14 +1,17 @@
 ---
 name: Feature request
 about: Suggest an improvement or new capability
-labels: enhancement
+type: Feature
 ---
 
-**What problem does this solve?**
-Describe the use case or pain point.
+**What problem does this solve? For whom?**
+Describe the use case or pain point. Who is the user/who experiences the pain?
 
 **What would the solution look like?**
 How you imagine it working (CLI flags, output format, behavior, etc.).
 
 **Alternatives considered**
 Any other approaches you've thought about.
+
+<!-- Don't worry about scoping or sizing this — the team works that out during
+     grooming (see "Grooming an issue for pickup" in CONTRIBUTING.md). -->

.github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/task.md

@@ -0,0 +1,16 @@
+---
+name: Task / chore
+about: Internal work — tooling, refactor, docs, repo admin, validation
+type: Task
+---
+
+**What needs doing?**
+The task in a sentence or two.
+
+**Why**
+What this unblocks or improves. Link related issues/epics if part of a larger effort.
+
+<!-- This template is mainly for the team filing its own work. If you already
+     know the acceptance criteria / scope / where to start (and a rough size, if
+     useful), add them now — otherwise they get filled in at grooming
+     (see CONTRIBUTING.md). -->

.github/dependabot.yml

@@ -0,0 +1,33 @@
+# Dependabot version updates (#47). Complements the pip-audit gate in
+# security.yml rather than duplicating it: pip-audit BLOCKS merges on known CVEs
+# in the production set; Dependabot opens fix PRs and keeps versions current —
+# including GitHub Actions, which nothing else watches.
+#
+# target-branch matters: without it Dependabot targets the default branch's
+# releases against `main`-style flow. This repo's PRs land on `develop`, so both
+# ecosystems point there explicitly.
+#
+# Grouping keeps the noise to roughly one PR per ecosystem per week; majors stay
+# ungrouped so a breaking bump gets its own review.
+version: 2
+updates:
+  - package-ecosystem: "uv"
+    directory: "/"
+    target-branch: "develop"
+    schedule:
+      interval: "weekly"
+    open-pull-requests-limit: 5
+    groups:
+      python-minor-patch:
+        update-types: ["minor", "patch"]
+      dev-dependencies:
+        dependency-type: "development"
+
+  - package-ecosystem: "github-actions"
+    directory: "/"
+    target-branch: "develop"
+    schedule:
+      interval: "weekly"
+    groups:
+      actions:
+        patterns: ["*"]

.github/pull_request_template.md

@@ -1,13 +1,28 @@
+## Related issue
+
+<!-- Link the issue this addresses so the issue and its board card resolve on merge.
+     Repeat the keyword per issue (Closes #1, closes #2); it does not distribute across a list. -->
+Closes #
+
 ## What does this change?
 
 <!-- Brief description of what you changed and why. -->
 
 ## How to test
 
-<!-- How can a reviewer verify this works? -->
+<!-- How can a reviewer verify this works? Note what you ran or eyeballed, not just "tests pass." -->
 
 ## Checklist
 
-- [ ] Fast tests pass (`uv run pytest -m "not slow"`)
-- [ ] Linting passes (`uv run ruff check .`)
-- [ ] New code has tests (if applicable)
+- [ ] Linked the issue above (`Closes #...`)
+- [ ] Ran the CI gates locally and they pass (see [What CI checks](CONTRIBUTING.md#what-ci-checks))
+- [ ] New or changed behavior has tests
+- [ ] For a bug fix: the test fails without the fix, and I ran it both ways to check
+- [ ] Disclosed AI assistance below, if any
+
+## AI assistance
+
+<!-- Used an AI coding assistant? Name it. It's welcome and it isn't held against the
+     change; it just tells a reviewer where to look harder. Delete this section if not.
+     See CONTRIBUTING.md#ai-assisted-contributions. -->
+