Define difference between collaborator and committer

[phillipj]

I'm working on a talk about contributing open source to the Node.js project, and noticed both collaborator and committer mentioned in this repo. In the current contributing guide, collaborator isn't even mentioned. In fact that's the only document I've seen which use the term committer.

It would have been helpful with an explanation between the two terms. The only hint I've got so far is a comment reply in the PR creating the contributing guide: #40 (comment)

/cc @mikeal

[Fishrock123]

Same thing at the current time.

We should move towards using the term committer instead for various reasons though, but that will take some time I think. (And may be forgotten..)

[phillipj]

We should move towards using the term committer instead for various reasons though

Thanks, that at least gives me an answer about what term I should use.

@Fishrock123 would it be appropriate to s/collaborator/committer in README.md in the repos we've got under the nodejs org?

[Trott]

@phillipj I would be cautious about that. Especially in the node repo, the term collaborator was no doubt chosen very deliberately over the term committer, probably for some (perhaps all) of the following reasons:

• emphasize consensus-driven decision making
• de-emphasize hierarchy (especially BDFL model)
• emphasize that code is not the only valued form of contribution
• de-emphasize the role as one that gets bestowed privileges and emphasize it as one that welcomes someone to a community

(No opinion from me on the TSC repo, though. I'm just chiming in because you asked about other repos, and I've got an opinion.) EDIT: Or maybe I misunderstood your question.

[Fishrock123]

cc @mikeal

[williamkapke]

This may fall under "teams have autonomy" and can call them whatever they want. Which I don't think provides a good/cohesive environment for newcomers (just my opinion though).

Also related: https://github.com/nodejs/collaboration

[phillipj]

@Trott thanks for your input. You understood correctly, one of the readmes I was thinking about was absolutely node core as it probably gets most attention, and therefore would have helped the most to get the committer term out there. Too bad it wasn't that simple after all.

IMO using these two terms easily leads to confusion. An explicit explanation of what separates the two would be most valuable.

[fhemberger]

The website team used the term "collaborator" so far. For the same reasons @Trott already mentioned, I'm not entirely happy with "comitter". And we should also try to use the same terms across all working groups/teams.

[mikeal]

The website has two teams and a slightly different governance model though. There's a "Website WG" and the "Website Admin Group" which is a subset of the Website WG. Collaborator may be an easier term since there is variance from what others are doing.

[phillipj]

Is the term "committer" actually used and preferred over "collaborator" anywhere atm?

[sam-github]

We need to give commit access to people, so they can collaborate at all, for example, by tagging issues, closing issues, etc. Collaborators have commit access, but may not actually commit code, it seems more general (to me). I thought that was why we used the term.

[Trott]

Collaborator is also the term used in the GitHub interface, FWIW. (In a repo you own, go to Settings and there's "Collaborators" is an option on the left side.)

[williamkapke]

FWIW, they are defined in the TSC-Charter...

TSC-Charter Section 9:

Individuals making significant and valuable contributions, “Contributor(s)”, are made Collaborators and given commit-access to the project. These individuals are identified by the TSC and their addition as Collaborators is discussed during the weekly TSC meeting.

TSC-Charter Section 10:

Contributors: contribute code or other artifacts, but do not have the right to commit to the code base. Contributors work with the Project’s Collaborators to have code committed to the code base. A Contributor may be promoted to a Collaborator by the projects’ Maintainer or the TSC. Contributors should rarely be encumbered by the TSC and never by the Board.

So, consider that the carter may need to be updated if the group decides to go with something else. A task that involves The Board.

[phillipj]

Thanks @williamkapke 👍 So the charter identifies contributors and collaborators, no mention of committers. I'm still wondering why we want/need to use the term "committer". IMO using that term in favor of "collaborator" only leads to confusion.

[jasnell]

If this is still something that should be done, we can reopen the issue. Closing due to inactivity