Skip to content

Follow the upstream skills/ vs dev-skills/ split - #1

Merged
nekrut merged 1 commit into
galaxyproject:mainfrom
dannon:follow-galaxy-skills-layout
Sep 17, 2026
Merged

nekrut merged 1 commit into
galaxyproject:mainfrom
dannon:follow-galaxy-skills-layout

Conversation

@dannon

@dannon dannon commented Sep 17, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

galaxyproject/galaxy-skills#35 reorganizes that repo into two trees -- skills/ for using Galaxy, dev-skills/ for building it, with no harness scanning the latter. sync-skills.sh rsyncs the upstream root, so once #35 lands it would vendor both trees a level deeper and gen-manifests.py would register all 16 skills as one bundle, which quietly undoes the split. Your weekly sync would open that PR on its own.

So each tree gets vendored into its own plugin: galaxy-skills stays the analyst set (7 skills), galaxy-dev-skills carries tool-dev, nf-to-galaxy, update-usegalaxy-tool, trackhubs and hub-news-posts (9). Nothing is lost -- people install the half they want, which is your "install only the plugins you need" line applied one level down.

Two things worth a look:

The skill files under plugins/*/skills/ are sync output, run against the #35 branch so CI can see the end state. Re-pin to main once #35 merges. The vendored tree also stops carrying upstream's AGENTS.md and README.md, since those describe the whole repo rather than what lands in a plugin -- say the word if you'd rather keep them.

CI needed changes either way: both jobs asserted galaxy-skills:tool-dev and nf-process-to-galaxy-tool, which move. I also dropped the #36 workaround from the Codex validator step -- #35 quotes the argument-hint value, so all 76 skills parse as strict YAML and the validator can run across every plugin with no exception. validate.py with pyyaml reports zero warnings now.

Locally: validate.py OK (4 plugins, 76 skills), claude plugin validate --strict passes on the marketplace and all four plugins. Skill count stays 76, so both CI thresholds of 70 still hold.

Not addressed here, but worth deciding separately: galaxy-connect overlaps upstream's galaxy-integration, and its advice about searching for get_user rather than assuming a tool-name prefix is better than what upstream says. That probably wants to go upstream so there's one connect skill rather than two.

galaxyproject/galaxy-skills#35 reorganizes that repo into two trees: skills/ for
using Galaxy and dev-skills/ for building it, with no harness scanning the latter.
sync-skills.sh rsyncs the upstream root, so once that lands it would vendor both
trees a level deeper and gen-manifests would register all 16 skills as one bundle,
which quietly undoes the split. So each tree now gets vendored into its own plugin
instead: galaxy-skills stays the analyst set and galaxy-dev-skills carries tool-dev,
nf-to-galaxy, update-usegalaxy-tool, trackhubs and hub-news-posts. Nothing is lost,
people just install the half they want.

Skill files under plugins/*/skills/ are the output of the sync, run against the #35
branch so CI can see the end state -- re-pin to main once it merges. The vendored
tree no longer carries upstream's AGENTS.md and README.md, since those describe the
whole repo rather than what ends up in a plugin.

CI needed updating either way: both jobs asserted galaxy-skills:tool-dev and
nf-process-to-galaxy-tool, which now live in the other plugin. Also dropped the
galaxy-skills#36 frontmatter workaround from the Codex validator step -- #35 quotes
the argument-hint value, so all 76 skills parse as strict YAML and the validator can
run against every plugin without an exception.
@dannon

dannon commented Sep 17, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

@nekrut if you want to merge galaxyproject/galaxy-skills#35 and then this one, I think that gets it all into the right shape.

Only loose end after that is re-pinning both galaxy-skills mirrors to main -- the vendored files here are synced off the #35 branch so CI could see the end state.

@nekrut
nekrut merged commit 5e8c7f4 into galaxyproject:main Sep 17, 2026
6 of 7 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants