Add GitHub info for wg-nll

[rylev]

The types team is the likely successor of the work.

Note: I also added a [[github]] annotation to the wg defintion in the unlikely case that the wg is revived, since until now the permissions have been manually curated on GitHub.

cc @nikomatsakis @pnkfelix

[jackh726]

I think it's probably just worth waiting until NLL stabilization. That's hopefully coming soon™

While I think most of the members here aren't active much anyways, the group as an entity is good to help organize the final stabilization push. (I'm mostly thinking the wg-nll zulip stream. The formal working group might very well be overkill.)

[rylev]

I'll let @nikomatsakis weigh in here, but I am of the opinion that when in doubt we should keep the wg around. However, I believe Niko was keen on seeing this responsibility moved to the new types team.

[jackh726]

Oh this definitely would fall under the types team. But I think this would still exist, either in the form of an initiative or a working group.

[rylev]

@jackh726 that sounds reasonable. One additional thing to consider is that we will also be syncing Zulip user groups through the team repo (see rust-lang/sync-team#3) so if we want @wg-nll to work on Zulip, we should still keep it around.

[rylev]

Ok I shifted this to just add the GitHub info to the wg definition since that should be without controversy. We can still archive at a later point.

[Mark-Simulacrum]

This will create a duplicate team with wg-compiler-nll, which has many more members. Happy to merge, but we should probably have a follow-up of deduplicating here one way or another. I'm not sure if there's repositories wg-compiler-nll has access to.

[rylev]

@Mark-Simulacrum indeed. The plan is to remove the wg-compiler-nll group in favor of wg-nll. Before removing it, I would check with the members who are not in the working group but are in the old user group to ensure we reach consistency.