ci(issue-template): create Website issue template

[AnkitRewar11]

Notes for Reviewers

This PR fixes #1098

This PR creates a dedicated "Website" GitHub issue template (.github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/website.md) for schemas.meshery.io, following the repository's casing rules and issue template conventions.

Changes Included

• Added .github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/website.md with [Website] title prefix and area/website, framework/jekyll labels.
• Included standard contributor guides and handbook footer links as specified in [CI] Create a "Website" GitHub issue template #1098.

Signed commits

• Yes, I signed my commits.

Summary by CodeRabbit

• Documentation
  • Added a dedicated issue template for reporting website-related problems.
  • The template guides reporters to describe current and desired behavior and include optional screenshots or logs.
  • Added links to relevant contributor resources.

[welcome]

Yay, your first pull request! 👍 A contributor will be by to give feedback soon. In the meantime, you can find updates in the #github-notifications channel in the community Slack.
Be sure to double-check that you have signed your commits. Here are instructions for making signing an implicit activity while performing a commit.

[coderabbitai]

No actionable comments were generated in the recent review. 🎉

ℹ️ Recent review info

⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: defaults

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro Plus

Run ID: cd5590ca-1bc9-4a40-b45b-c177954fa631

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between c8c440d and 839e643.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)

• .github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/website.md

---

📝 Walkthrough

Walkthrough

Adds a GitHub issue template for website-related reports. The template includes metadata, behavior prompts, optional screenshots or logs, and contributor resource links.

Changes

Website issue reporting

Layer / File(s)	Summary
Website issue intake template .github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/website.md	Adds GitHub issue metadata, prompts for current and desired behavior, optional screenshots or logs, and contributor resource links.

Estimated code review effort: 1 (Trivial) | ~2 minutes

🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 5

✅ Passed checks (5 passed)

Check name	Status	Explanation
Description Check	✅ Passed	Check skipped - CodeRabbit’s high-level summary is enabled.
Title check	✅ Passed	The title clearly identifies the creation of a Website issue template, which is the main change.
Linked Issues check	✅ Passed	The PR adds the dedicated Website issue template, website-specific sections, and contributor resources required by issue #1098.
Out of Scope Changes check	✅ Passed	The changes are limited to the requested Website issue template and its supporting content.
Docstring Coverage	✅ Passed	No functions found in the changed files to evaluate docstring coverage. Skipping docstring coverage check.

✨ Finishing Touches

🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)

• Create PR with unit tests

---

_{Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands.}

[coderabbitai]

Actionable comments posted: 1

🤖 Prompt for all review comments with AI agents

Verify each finding against current code. Fix only still-valid issues, skip the
rest with a brief reason, keep changes minimal, and validate.

Inline comments:
In @.github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/website.md:
- Line 9: Update the top-level section headings in the website issue template,
including “Current Behavior” and the peer sections at the referenced locations,
from level-3 headings to level-2 headings so the template hierarchy is
consistent and satisfies MD001.

🪄 Autofix (Beta)

Fix all unresolved CodeRabbit comments on this PR:

• Push a commit to this branch (recommended)
• Create a new PR with the fixes

---

ℹ️ Review info

⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: defaults

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro Plus

Run ID: 5245efa7-8f52-4cb7-a21c-b89377fc720b

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 04571f6 and c8c440d.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)

• .github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/website.md

[Maanvi212006]

Went through this end to end (diff, content, labels config, and checked live labels on GitHub) — LGTM overall.

One thing to fix before merge: the template uses area/website as a label, but that label doesn't actually exist in the repo yet. Right now it'll just silently not get applied when someone files an issue. Could we create it first, or use an existing label instead?

[AnkitRewar11]

@Maanvi212006 Thanks for catching that! If we have to use a pre-existing label here, I think area/docs is the best option as it already serves schemas.meshery.io. Do you think that makes sense, or would you prefer introducing a dedicated area/website label instead?

[Maanvi212006]

@AnkitRewar11 maybe we can introduce a new label dedicated to website.
@rishiraj38 @ishwar170695 suggestions?

[ishwar170695]

@Maanvi212006 I lean towards using area/docs for now.
Looking through the repository, I don't see evidence that the website is treated as a separate area, and we already have framework/jekyll to distinguish website-related issues. Unless there's a broader plan to split website work into its own category, reusing area/docs seems sufficient.

[AnkitRewar11]

Sounds good! I'll update the label to area/docs and push the changes. Since it's already being used for both documentation and website-related content, I think it's the most appropriate choice for now.
@Maanvi212006 @ishwar170695

[AnkitRewar11]

@ishwar170695 Hello, good morning! Please, whenever you have time, take a look at this. Have a nice day! 🙌

[Maanvi212006]

LGTM!

[winkletinkle]

Docs?

Perhaps, a new dedicated label is needed.

[AnkitRewar11]

Sir, I had initially suggested using area/website, as you can see in the earlier conversation above. However, I later changed it to area/docs. Although area/website was a new label, after our discussion I felt that area/docs was the most appropriate choice, so I updated it accordingly.

[emphor11]

LGTM!

[AnkitRewar11]

Hey, could you please have a look when you get some time and let me know if there are any other changes needed? Otherwise, I think everything looks good. @banana-three-join

[banana-three-join]

I don't agree with the area/docs label. There's currently a docs folder and a documentation.md template which already uses the 'area/docs, framework/jekyll, language/markdown' labels so there needs to be a bigger differentiator between the two of them to have a better track of the issues.

You can use something like area/site since that's the folder where the main logic for https://schemas.meshery.io/ resides.

[AnkitRewar11]

I also agree with your point about using the Area/Site label. However, @ishwar170695 and @Maanvi212006 suggested that since this is a new label, using Area/Docs would be more appropriate. That said, we can go with Area/Site if you think that’s better. I’ll push a new commit with the Area/Site label. @banana-three-join

[banana-three-join]

I did see both of their points and while I do think they're right, I also think that applying a placeholder label in the meanwhile because there isn't another label available, isn't the preferred approach. Let me go take a look at to how the other repos do it so I can comeback with a more conclusive answer.

Thanks to both of you for helping out over in this area! @Maanvi212006 @AnkitRewar11