[umangyadav]

Transfers code ownership of the repository to @ilango100, @rachgupt93, @gouthamb-amd and @asparkhi, matching ROCm/rocmlirTriton#562.

All four entries in .github/CODEOWNERS now list only the new owners: the catch-all * and the security-perimeter paths .github/workflows/, .github/scripts/ and .claude/. The previous owner (@causten) is removed.

All four new owners have write access to the repository, so GitHub will honor the entries. No other files need updating: README.md and CONTRIBUTING.md link to CODEOWNERS rather than naming people.

[Copilot]

🟢 Approval recommended

The CODEOWNERS entries are consistent, and all listed owners have sufficient repository access.

0 open findings

What changed in this PR

Transfers repository code ownership to the four maintainers, consistent with ROCm/rocmlirTriton#562.

Changes:

• Replaces the previous owner across all CODEOWNERS entries.
• Assigns the catch-all and security-sensitive paths to the four new owners.

File	Description
.github/​CODEOWNERS	Updates ownership for the repository and protected automation paths.

🧠 Review effort: Balanced

---

💡 Add a code-review agent skill or configure MCP servers for context-aware, tailored reviews. Learn more in the docs.

[rocmlir-pr-reviewer]

Verdict: APPROVE -- submitted as COMMENT (automated reviews are advisory)  ·  Findings: 0 (0 Critical, 0 Major, 0 Minor)

---

Scope

Single-file ownership transfer: .github/CODEOWNERS moves all four entries — the catch-all * plus the three security-perimeter paths (.github/workflows/, .github/scripts/, .claude/) — from the previous sole owner to @ilango100 @rachgupt93 @gouthamb-amd @asparkhi. No code, build, or test changes.

Findings

No blocking issues found.

Syntax is valid (space-separated @handle list, no trailing-whitespace or missing-newline problems), all four entries were updated consistently rather than leaving a partial transfer, and the explanatory comment block describing the Claude auto-review trust perimeter is left intact and still accurate — it refers to the entries structurally ("the explicit entries below"), never by owner name, so it does not go stale with this change.

Notes

• No stale references elsewhere. Confirmed that CONTRIBUTING.md:40 points at [CODEOWNERS](.github/CODEOWNERS) by link rather than naming an individual, and SECURITY.md routes reports through GitHub private vulnerability reporting and the AMD product-security portal rather than a named maintainer. Nothing else in the repo needs a companion edit.
• Approval semantics change (intentional, worth being aware of). With a single owner, every PR touching the security perimeter required that one person's approval. With four, GitHub's code-owner review requirement is satisfied by any one of them. That is the normal consequence of spreading ownership and matches the comment block's stated intent ("the obvious place to add additional reviewers"), but it does widen who can single-handedly approve a change to the workflow/sanitizer/skill files that gate secret-bearing CI. If stricter control is wanted for those three paths specifically, a GitHub ruleset requiring multiple approvals is the mechanism — CODEOWNERS alone cannot express "N of these four".
• Handle validity is the one unverifiable precondition. GitHub silently drops a CODEOWNERS entry whose user does not exist or lacks write access — no CI error, the path just becomes effectively unowned. The PR description states all four have write access; worth a quick confirmation that GitHub's CODEOWNERS editor shows no "Unknown owner" / "not have write access" warnings on this branch before merge, since a typo here fails open rather than loud.
• Follow-up idea for a separate PR (not a change request): the same four handles are now duplicated across four lines, and the next ownership change will touch all four again. A GitHub team handle would collapse this to one name per line and let membership changes happen outside the repo. CODEOWNERS has no alias mechanism, so a team is the only DRY option; purely optional.

CI status

All non-self checks pass (C/C++ premerge checks, Python format and lint checks, Python performance script tests, Detect relevant changes, detect, copilot-pull-request-reviewer). notify-fork-pr is skipped as expected for a non-fork PR, and the review check in progress is this auto-review pipeline itself. No failures or cancellations.