Include collaborators/team members in the README? about automation HOT 8 CLOSED

So..one thing to consider. Listing people in the README makes it less quite for inactive people to leave later, as is the case with Node core. It puts extra expectations/responsibilities on the collaborators, even for the people in the collaborator team who are already TSC members. An informal team makes things simpler.

That said, I don't mind listing people in the README if everyone listed approve the PR.

from automation.

As mentioned in nodejs/diagnostics#127 (comment) we could actually let the bot sync the team membership and the README.

from automation.

Maybe then could we just list the Collaborators, and not the team members? I get your point @joyeecheung but I feel it would still help identify who to ping on specific questions, but maybe I'm wrong.

from automation.

I agree with @Tiriel , I think the list will become hard to maintain if you list all members on our team.

from automation.

@Tiriel well if it's just for the ping, you can ping the whole team with @nodejs/automation and @nodejs/automation-collaborators and @nodejs/automation-admins(I've put the text in backticks because I am not actually pinging everyone in this thread, but you know.)

(Or maybe I should ping everyone in this thread?)

from automation.

I'm +1 on listing, as all other WGs do, but I don't feel strongly.

from automation.

I don't think it's needed. If will be an extra pain to keep updating it with the time, adding removing etc. Also, NodeJS/node, all the email addresses are public, it sometimes leads to spam, as per my experience.

I agree with @joyeecheung, one can ping the whole team, whenever it's needed.

from automation.

well if it's just for the ping, you can ping the whole team with @nodejs/automation and @nodejs/automation-collaborators and @nodejs/automation-admins (I've put the text in backticks because I am not actually pinging everyone in this thread, but you know.)

True, but as said, it also seems to be some sort of "standard" amongst aother teams/WG. I do think it helps putting "faces" on a project. But indeed, listing everyone and keeping the list up to date would be a pain in the arse, so collaborators only seems a good compromise to me.

And just in case, we can make this list on a "voluntary listing oneself" basis. Each person can opt-out of the listing if they want (without actually opting-out of the team/collaborators).

Would that satisfy everyone?

from automation.