GeezerVison

lychee cannot resolve links like /assets/img/foo.png without being told
the repo root, so any changed file containing a pre-existing root-relative
link fails the check even though the link is valid. Pass --root-dir . so
lychee resolves these against the repo root.

Observed in PR #926, which failed on an unrelated pre-existing image link.

The old guidance ("one talk is one data point, not proof a pattern is
widely applicable") read as a reason to hold back drafting a genuine
new-pattern candidate. But this process only ever sees one talk at a
time, so that standard would mean a new pattern candidate never gets
drafted at all. Checked meta/contributor-handbook.md: maturity level 1
(Initial) has NO validation requirement - it's explicitly for a single
unstructured idea. One instance is what's needed for level 2
(Structured); only 3+ need level 3 (Validated). So the guidance now says
to draft at Initial from one talk, which is exactly what that level is
for - confirmed against Paired Onboarding Sprint (InnerSourceCommons#926), the first
pattern this skill has drafted this way.

Co-authored-by: Claude Sonnet 5 <[email protected]>

…stance

Topical keyword overlap (e.g. 'developer environment') isn't enough - the
GDK/Internal Developer Platform mismatch on InnerSourceCommons#926 happened because a local
dev tool got matched to a pattern about centralized, deployed platforms
purely on theme.

* Add analyze-innersource-video Claude Code skill

Adds a Claude Code skill that analyzes an InnerSource Commons community
call video against this repo's pattern library: it fetches the talk's
transcript and metadata, surveys adjacent patterns, and categorizes the
talk's content into Known Instance candidates, clarifications to an
existing pattern, or genuinely new pattern candidates - applying a
"uniquely InnerSource" filter to screen out generic engineering advice
that isn't specific to cross-team, cross-org contribution dynamics.

The skill always proposes and asks for confirmation before editing any
pattern file or opening a PR - it never auto-commits. This was already
used manually to produce the Thales Group Known Instance PR (#909); this
commit is the first time the skill itself is checked into the repo
rather than living only on one contributor's machine.

Co-authored-by: Claude Sonnet 5 <[email protected]>

* Accept a transcript directly, and bundle one talk into one PR

Two corrections per review:

- Step 1 now accepts a transcript handed to it directly (the
  going-forward case: an automated source pulls a Zoom transcript once a
  community call finishes, with no YouTube URL involved at all) as well
  as a YouTube URL to fetch from - the URL-fetch path stays for backlog
  talks and one-off requests.
- Step 8's "one concern per PR" is replaced with "one talk = one PR":
  bundle everything a single talk's analysis found - Known Instances
  across multiple patterns, clarifications, new pattern drafts - into
  one PR, matching how #909 actually added Thales across five patterns
  in a single PR. Only split PRs across genuinely different source talks.

Co-authored-by: Claude Sonnet 5 <[email protected]>

* Write the whole skill as transcript-first, not YouTube-first

Per review: stop framing this as two parallel input paths ("YouTube URL
or transcript"). The skill takes a transcript - full stop; where it came
from is the caller's concern, not something this document needs to
branch on. YouTube-specific fetch mechanics (youtube-transcript-api,
yt-dlp) stay as a practical note for when a transcript still needs to be
pulled from a video, not as the document's primary framing. Generalizes
metadata field descriptions and "cite the source link" away from
video-specific phrasing, and retitles the output template's "Video
summary" to "Talk summary" to match.

Co-authored-by: Claude Sonnet 5 <[email protected]>

* Stop discouraging new-pattern drafts from a single talk

The old guidance ("one talk is one data point, not proof a pattern is
widely applicable") read as a reason to hold back drafting a genuine
new-pattern candidate. But this process only ever sees one talk at a
time, so that standard would mean a new pattern candidate never gets
drafted at all. Checked meta/contributor-handbook.md: maturity level 1
(Initial) has NO validation requirement - it's explicitly for a single
unstructured idea. One instance is what's needed for level 2
(Structured); only 3+ need level 3 (Validated). So the guidance now says
to draft at Initial from one talk, which is exactly what that level is
for - confirmed against Paired Onboarding Sprint (#926), the first
pattern this skill has drafted this way.

Co-authored-by: Claude Sonnet 5 <[email protected]>

* Read README's pattern list instead of extracting patlets

Per Sebastian Spier's review: the repo's own README.md already has a
"List of Patterns" section with every pattern's title and patlet, kept
current as patterns are added (spot-checked against the newest merged
pattern - it's there). Reading that one file directly is simpler and
more reliable than writing and running a script to walk the patterns/
directory and regex out each Patlet section.

Co-authored-by: Claude Sonnet 5 <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Sebastian Spier <[email protected]>

* Require checking a pattern's actual Solution before citing a Known Instance

Topical keyword overlap (e.g. 'developer environment') isn't enough - the
GDK/Internal Developer Platform mismatch on #926 happened because a local
dev tool got matched to a pattern about centralized, deployed platforms
purely on theme.

---------

Co-authored-by: Claude Sonnet 5 <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Sebastian Spier <[email protected]>