Repository navigation
governance: add new collaborators #XI #5779
Description
Activity
Looking forward to it :)
Me too :)
@evanlucas did a good job and answered all the questions we've had in the last onboarding.
Previous thread #5064
Recent-ish commit activity should not be the only metric we look at of course. (Just stating the obvious for the benefit of outside observers.) But it's not a useless metric either. So here's a list:
- based on commits landed in the last three months
- omitting current collaborators
- sorted by number of commits
- at least ten commits in the time frame
And here are the results:
- Santiago Gimeno (@santigimeno) 18 commits
- Alexander Makarenko (@estliberitas) 14 commits
- Jackson Tian (@JacksonTian) 11 commits
If I am a collaborator, I will spend more time on it.
What about @ralt ? Added two fs functions (
mkdtemp) including tests and docs.@benjamingr I don't have 10+ commits :)
@ralt that's not a requirement, I think we need more people with the capacity of adding core functionality - Petka was added for a single commit too. Of course, I am just suggesting you, it's not an obligation on either end. If you'd rather wait until you have commits in that's entirely reasonable.
The mkdtemp was a one-off thing, although I'll probably add mkstemp once it's in libuv too. Not sure what this whole collaborator thing is though. :-)
@ralt There's documentation here: https://github.com/nodejs/node/blob/master/GOVERNANCE.md#collaborators
It more or less means commit / issues management access to the project. Good if you plan on having some time here and there to dedicate to the project for whatever reason. :)
Perhaps we should have a monthly open meeting on what it means to be a committer, collaborator, etc. and how to do it? Is there a reason to limit only to nominees? Perhaps the CTC could do a monthly approval in the immediately following CTC meeting. Is monthly the right cadence?
Another q for thought - should there be a process/policy to remove collaborators when they move on? For example, that policy could be that if you make less than 10 contributions over 6 months you lose collaborator status; of course you can always be re-approved, and maybe we have a fast-track for returning members.
@joshgav the problem with a metric based system like the one you describe is that there are many ways people can contribute as a collaborator without contributing code, not all of which are easily measurable.
AFAIK having too many collaborators has not been considered a pain, so perhaps we should avoid trying to fix something that may not be broken
18 remaining items
http://doodle.com/poll/5w3t9rbhyu6rfekr is the doodle poll.
Please select the times at which you are able. Thanks! /cc @Trott
ok, sorry. I had a little trouble with doodle, so if you had already signed up, you may need to again :[
Ok, sorry I messed up doodle again. I started over. http://doodle.com/poll/a2qaz7k57uvwhuhp is the new link. If everyone could get that in over the next day or so, we can get this thing scheduled. Thanks!
Ok, the date is set for now for Friday, April 15 at 12:00 PM CST. I'll send everyone a calendar invite. Thanks!
Reacted by Anna HenningsenReacted by Jeremiah SenkpielHooray!
Just in case anyone is converting to their local time, it's probably CDT (UTC -5) and not CST (UTC -6)
That was a very short window for response since the previous Doodle...
So 2:00 am in Japan. Not technically impossible, but being interviewed like a zombie while keeping my wife from sleeping may not be the best idea. Is there still a point in me filling out the Doodle or should I wait for the next round?
@ronkorving Would you be able to make 8AM Tokyo / 4PM California work if we made a point to make that the time for the next one? Would 1PM Tokyo / 9PM California work?
1PM Tokyo would be ideal for me. 8AM could work, but is second choice :) Thanks for taking my timezone into consideration 👍
@ronkorving apologies on that. Thanks for picking up my slack @Trott :]
No worries :) Thanks guys.
On the next round of this I'd love to get @eljefedelrodeodeljefe onboarded. They've been providing a ton of great reviews and work around documentation.
Reacted by Anna Henningsen@Fishrock123 Thanks for mentioning me. I have responded on doodle.
Would be great to onboard some of the qualifying folks who missed the last round. Names that immediately leap to mind:
I'm sure there are more.
In addition to the onboardees, can we identify who are the folks who are comfortable and capable of being onboarders? @chrisdickinson and @Fishrock123 are, of course. Are there others now? @evanlucas and/or @cjihrig? Is it sufficient for @thealphanerd and/or me to simply shrug and say "Sure, I can wing it based on what I remember and the documentation"? Or not so much?