You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
{{ message }}
This repository was archived by the owner on Nov 18, 2021. It is now read-only.
Repository navigation
This repository was archived by the owner on Nov 18, 2021. It is now read-only.
[Meta] clarify policy around collaborator status for this repo #1472
I would like to know if there is a possibility to add other collaborators to this repo? Yes, to be perfectly honest I am asking primarily for myself, since I have contributed quite a lot to this repo (57 issues at the time of writing, of which I submitted 27 myself), but there's a limit to how much I can contribute without having collaborator access. For example, I can't:
Add or amend labels on issues
Close issues which are resolved, unless I submitted them myself
However the question is not just for me: I'm sure there are other contributors out there who would be able to help make this repo even better if they had collaborator privileges.
I see from #430 and #459 that there has been some kind of process for adding collaborators in the past, but it would be nice if the policy around this was clarified, even if the policy is "we won't ever add any new collaborators, sorry".
@isaacs responded very quickly and has kindly made me and @TPS collaborators. Since this issue was mainly about the policy / process around changing collaborator status, I'll leave it open for now.
Also, is there anyplace there's a complete public list of collaborators, &/or a way to notify the whole group @isaacs/collaborators - style? I'd like to open perhaps some meta-issues to hammer things out between us (e.g., labeling or comment policy), or have users ping us.
I'd also love a discussion/overhaul re: the 94 (!) labels in this repo: IMHO, too many are overly specific or vague, which makes it a bit of a 🎱 [Magic 8-Ball] kinda choice to properly categorize issues. I've done a little work w/ them, but some collaboration might be more effective.
Would be happy to audit the labels at some point. There are some names I’ve used like render which are internal to GitHub and need explanation to have meaning. I want the labels to be obvious and useful internally and externally.
@TPS@clarkbw Brilliant idea to have a labels overhaul! However it's off-topic for this issue, so I submitted #1549. Let's track it there.
Regarding https://github.com/isaacs/github/community, again it's off-topic for this issue, but I suggest that we have one issue for each aspect which needs addressing. [EDIT]: here's a list - once a separate issue is filed for an item, let's tick the checkbox and link to it:
@TPS Good idea re locking! - I've added it to the list, and updated my comment above about how to use the list. I've also started filing more new issues. Would prefer not to delete your comment as it makes the history harder for others to follow.
Activity
cirosantilli commentedon Feb 4, 2019
@isaacs hasn't replied in a while to at mentions, and no one else can add new people.
The only solution is a side channel contact with him, try email or the contact form on his website or twitter.
For the record, I support adding @aspiers as a collaborator.
aspiers commentedon Feb 4, 2019
Thanks a lot @cirosantilli. I'll see if I can reach @isaacs some other way.
aspiers commentedon Feb 21, 2019
I just emailed @isaacs about this.
aspiers commentedon Feb 22, 2019
@isaacs responded very quickly and has kindly made me and @TPS collaborators. Since this issue was mainly about the policy / process around changing collaborator status, I'll leave it open for now.
TPS commentedon Feb 25, 2019
I did close #619, though - that's specifically re: myself. 😊
TPS commentedon Feb 25, 2019
Also, is there anyplace there's a complete public list of collaborators, &/or a way to notify the whole group @isaacs/collaborators - style? I'd like to open perhaps some meta-issues to hammer things out between us (e.g., labeling or comment policy), or have users ping us.
clarkbw commentedon Feb 26, 2019
No, that’s only visible in the settings and you need to be an admin for that tab. Also no way to notify this meta group, something that’s a good idea.
I’m a collaborator as well. I also work at GitHub. ✨
aspiers commentedon Feb 27, 2019
Awesome to have you on board @clarkbw!
TPS commentedon Mar 1, 2019
Welcome, @clarkbw!
@isaacs, other admins & all collaborators: Whaddy'all think of #792 & #1510, which are proposals for issue templates, containing policies, &c?
TPS commentedon Mar 10, 2019
What happened to #459?
Also, should we do anything more w/ https://github.com/isaacs/github/community?
TPS commentedon Apr 22, 2019
I'd also love a discussion/overhaul re: the 94 (!) labels in this repo: IMHO, too many are overly specific or vague, which makes it a bit of a 🎱 [Magic 8-Ball] kinda choice to properly categorize issues. I've done a little work w/ them, but some collaboration might be more effective.
clarkbw commentedon Apr 23, 2019
Would be happy to audit the labels at some point. There are some names I’ve used like
renderwhich are internal to GitHub and need explanation to have meaning. I want the labels to be obvious and useful internally and externally.aspiers commentedon Apr 23, 2019
@TPS @clarkbw Brilliant idea to have a labels overhaul! However it's off-topic for this issue, so I submitted #1549. Let's track it there.
Regarding https://github.com/isaacs/github/community, again it's off-topic for this issue, but I suggest that we have one issue for each aspect which needs addressing. [EDIT]: here's a list - once a separate issue is filed for an item, let's tick the checkbox and link to it:
TPS commentedon Jun 7, 2019
@aspiers How about adding to above list (& then deleting this entire comment):
aspiers commentedon Jun 11, 2019
@TPS Good idea re locking! - I've added it to the list, and updated my comment above about how to use the list. I've also started filing more new issues. Would prefer not to delete your comment as it makes the history harder for others to follow.