governance: add new collaborators #IX

[mikeal]

Based on #3728 I went through all the people who committed recently but are not collaborators and then took a quick objective look at their commit history.

It's a long list, but I think that's because we haven't been doing as good of a job identifying people previously.

• @iarna 8 commits since Oct, 10 total commits
• @skomski 4 commits since Oct, 20+ total commits
• @john-yan 4 commits since Oct, 5 total commits
• @iwuzhere 3 commits since Oct, 4 total commits
• @fansworld-claudio 3 commits to docs since Oct 1.
• @a0viedo 3 commits since Oct, 4 total commits, all to docs.
• @jhamhader did 2 commits to zlib and tls.
• @JungMinu 1 commit since Oct1, 5 commits to debugger, benchmarks and docs (also an active Evangelism/Website contributor)
• @obastemur 1 commit since Oct, 4 total commits to util.h, debugger, contextify, and tools.
• @whitlockjc has 1 sizable commit that touches domains, asyncwrap, and a few other spots.
• @kapouer 1 commits since Oct, 18 total commits all over the code base.
• @zkat 1 commit since Oct and 13 commits representing most if not all of our npm upgrades in recent months.
• @rmg 1 commit since Oct, 13 total commits all over the code base.
• @calvinmetcalf 1 commit since Oct, 10 total commits all over the code, including crypto.
• @jwueller 1 sizable commit to fs, 2 total commits
• @pmq20 1 commit in Oct, 6 total commits to build and crypto.
• @thekemkid 5 commits to tracing.
• @ronkorving did 4 commits to fs and docs.
• @phillipj 4 commits to docs, is also active on the website WG.
• @jas- did 1 commit in Oct, 5 commits to doc and crypto total.

[Fishrock123]

Should probably be done like previous threads: #3472

Note that we have valued consistency.

[mikeal]

@Fishrock123 fixed title :)

[mikeal]

@Fishrock123 ya, I think we're missing a lot of people who are making sizable contributions with the prior subjective nomination methods. However, this is just meant to kick things off, if there are additional nominations we should consider them, but I thought it would be good to kick off with something a little more metrics driven, even if a little subjectively edited.

[jbergstroem]

Voting to nominate @skomski.

Edit: oops, he was already in the list.

[JungMinu]

Thanks for nominating me, I'm really interested and I'd love to be a collaborator 😄

[ronkorving]

Appreciate the vote of confidence :)
(more commits are on their way)

[pmq20]

@mikeal Thanks for nominating me, I feel kind of shamed in that I did not commit enough hard work into our project but still got nominated. If I were chosen as a collaborator I would devote my heart and soul.

[stelcheck]

👍 for @ronkorving - know him well, been working on Node.js since 0.4, and well, he's a good buddy with a good heart :)

[ghansali]

+1 for @ronkorving

[MiLk]

👍 for @ronkorving

[tokyowizard]

👍 for @ronkorving

[ronkorving]

guys, guys :) I appreciate the support, but don't spam the thread :)

[fengmk2]

👍 for @pmq20

[zack-lin]

👍 @pmq20

[daniel-dressler]

👍 @pmq20

[JacksonTian]

👍 for @pmq20

[atian25]

👍 for @pmq20

[pmq20]

Thank you all for supporting me! I have got to work harder to deserve it.

[czy88840616]

👍 for @pmq20

[gxcsoccer]

💯 for @pmq20

[Fishrock123]

Please stop spamming the thread with +1's -- those aren't useful here.

I'll unlock the issue in the morning my time.

[Fishrock123]

Some thoughts:

• The metrics are a bit misleading, historical commits should be total commits. I.e. Rebecca has 10 total, not 18. (Not saying this makes a difference, but I think we should sort that out)
• All of @john-yan's commits were in October, you need to use the committed dates instead of the authored dates, as commits are very regularly amended.
  • git log's --pretty=fuller, --format=%ci, or --format=%cd arguments will show this.
• A couple of those people have indicated in the past they'd rather not be collaborators, due to time constraints. (I think that's where @skomski was at, correct me if I'm wrong.)

[mikeal]

@Fishrock123

• Updated language to use total.
• Hrm... I'm pulling this out of the GitHub API so I'll need to see if I can somehow filter by merge date rather than authoring date.
• Sure, but if they show back up because they contributed again it's probably a good time to check back in :)

[phillipj]

I'm very interested and would love to contribute more to core :)

[mikeal]

I only ran the tool for October 1st to November 10th which was a rare window matthew wasn't committing :)

[mhdawson]

Could I also nominate @stefanmb. I think he did a good job on the commits for FIPs and I know he will continue to contribute going forward

[jasnell]

@mhdawson +1

[Fishrock123]

@mikeal could you please re-run the tool and open a new thread?

[mhdawson]

@mikeal when you do that can you let me know how gireeshpunathil shows up. I was a bit surprised he was not on the original list but it might be because a number of his PRs were for libuv

[mikeal]

@Fishrock123 help me come up with a name for this tool and I'll just put it in a repo here and you can run it ;)

[jwueller]

You could just go with "the nominator".

Mikeal Rogers notifications@github.com schrieb am Fr., 18. Dez. 2015,
01:24:

@Fishrock123 https://github.com/Fishrock123 help me come up with a name
for this tool and I'll just put it in a repo here and you can run it ;)

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#3761 (comment).

[mikeal]

actually, the code just produces the other report. i went through it by hand to pull these out.

[cjihrig]

Since this thread is still open, I'd like to nominate @feross - he has a handful of commits and has been active in the recent Buffer security discussions.

[mcollina]

👍 for @feross!

[jasnell]

+1 for @feross

[jbergstroem]

I'd like to nominate @santigimeno for the diligent work done with tests.

[bnoordhuis]

I second @santigimeno's nomination. He's also done good work on libuv.

[Trott]

Can't say enough good things about @santigimeno. 💯

[santigimeno]

Thanks for the nomination! :)

[rvagg]

Tons of great work contributed by @tomgco https://github.com/nodejs/node/pulls?utf8=%E2%9C%93&q=is%3Apr+author%3Atomgco, he gets a nomination from me.

[feross]

Thanks for the nomination!

[rvagg]

Nominating @AndreasMadsen who has been working hard in the Tracing WG and has been contributing some heavy work to AsyncWrap. Having >1 person with their head around AsyncWrap has got to be a win! https://github.com/nodejs/node/pulls?utf8=%E2%9C%93&q=is%3Apr+author%3AAndreasMadsen

[jasnell]

+1 to @tomgco, @AndreasMadsen, @santigimeno!

I'd like to nominate @tflanagan for the awesome work he's been doing as well.

[AndreasMadsen]

@rvagg Thanks for the nomination.

If you are looking at my very old commits, please be aware that my philosophies might have changed a bit since then. Feel free to ask! Also, while I do contribute to Tracing WG and AsyncWrap, I'm no where as technically qualified as @trevnorris - I'm a Math Student :)

[tflanagan]

Thanks @jasnell, I appreciate it 👍 :)

[Fishrock123]

Can someone just open a new thread on this?

Quite frankly I don't really have the time or energy to pull one of these together and update my onboarding docs.

Edit: I particularly don't want to be the only person doing this.

[whitlockjc]

If my nomination were officially processed, I'd offer to help. If there is any way I can help, please let me know. I'm very eager to be more involved, despite my recent code absence due to work.

[Trott]

@Fishrock123 wrote:

Can someone just open a new thread on this?

Sure. #5064

[Trott]

I'll be bold and close this one.

[cjihrig]

This has moved to #5064. Double check that your name is on the list if it should be.

@Fishrock123 I'm willing to help you.

[evanlucas]

@Fishrock123 I'm willing to help as well