Repository navigation
Reorder authors in README.md #1972
Description
(brought up in #1966, moved to its own place)
@rvagg suggested that we should reorder authors to remove any significance to their wg membership, such as when they joined or if they are part of the TC.
Lets agree on how this should be ordered. So far, last name or github username seems to be the two options. I like the idea of using the github username (and subsequently moving that ahead of name/email).
Activity
mscdex commentedon Jun 14, 2015
Anything that makes it easier to simply copy and paste for
Reviewed-By:lines 😀jbergstroem commentedon Jun 14, 2015
@mscdex that's already solved by #1966 👍
silverwind commentedon Jun 14, 2015
@mscdex
Needs a second terminal, but I'm sure there's a way to integrate this into vim too.
mscdex commentedon Jun 14, 2015
@silverwind It's actually usually easier/faster for me to grab it from the readme. I'm not always at a machine with git and such installed.
silverwind commentedon Jun 14, 2015
How about this format? (Would have put the real name in parens, but that would kill copiability)
@mscdex how do you merge witout git installed? 😯
mscdex commentedon Jun 14, 2015
@silverwind I suppose that format is ok.
jbergstroem commentedon Jun 14, 2015
I'm ok with that too.
silverwind commentedon Jun 14, 2015
And of course, sort by username.
chrisdickinson commentedon Jun 15, 2015
I am only sort of kidding here, but maybe we should sort by sha1 hash of collaborator line? I'd like to encourage folks to spell their names using whatever orthography they would naturally use, and sha1 gets us away from having to figure out how to sort multiple orthographies.
Edit: as @silverwind suggests, sorting by username would also work and involve far less hashing :)
You should be able to just do
:!revline(I think.) If not, turning it into a tiny shell script on $PATH would work.piscisaureus commentedon Jun 15, 2015
Was any motivation given?
jbergstroem commentedon Jun 15, 2015
@piscisaureus here's the full quote from the PR:
trevnorris commentedon Jun 16, 2015
Don't fully agree with that sentiment. While all collaborators are equals in terms of signing off a PR, the TSC is the team that has the absolute final say when something is controversial. So I believe that list of names should be at the top, not to show superiority but instead to make it easier for anyone to find their information.
brendanashworth commentedon Jun 24, 2015
Counter-suggestion: two groups of alphabetically sorted collaborators, those behind the security@ email, then those who aren't. (catering to both users searching for a contact & collaborators looking for reviewed-by emails)
jbergstroem commentedon Jun 24, 2015
@brendanashworth isn't all security email supposed to land in security@ anyway? (point being, we don't want people to be confused about where to send security related stuff)
brendanashworth commentedon Jun 25, 2015
@jbergstroem it should, but if someone is confused they may look down to the collaborator list and pick the first one they see. Probably not, but its just an idea.
doc: reorder collaborators by their usernames
jbergstroem commentedon Sep 3, 2015
Landed with #2322 (6ce8f5f)
doc: reorder collaborators by their usernames
doc: reorder collaborators by their usernames