Should the approval process take other authors more into account

[maelle]

At the moment "other authors" are invited to Slack at the same point as authors, but after approval, there's nothing automatic reg their access to the repository.

Should this change? E.g. should they get an invitation to the organization after approval, and then the main author would handle the access to the repo?

[mpadge]

Yes, something like that definitely should happen. But it'll be tricky to accurately identify "other authors", and i can imagine we may well end up needing some kind of explicit input from "main" author. At least potentially asking them to list all those whom they think should be added to org prior to final approval step?

[maelle]

I mean authors listed in https://github.com/ropensci/software-review/blob/983614e3d70a6565fcb0030cd295fc715966158a/.github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/A-submit-software-for-review.md?plain=1#L13

Now even if we invite them to the organization I don't think we should invite them to the package team since it has admin access and that's not necessarily what the maintainer wants.

[mpadge]

Yes, but also what i meant is that submitting authors are also free to mention all other authors of pkg, including "cph" authors and the like who might not have made any active contribution to the pacakge itself. So even that list out not necessarily be judged as "reliable". Does that make sense?

[maelle]

in that case should we edit the HTML comment description? Since we also invite them to slack, we assume they're "active".

[maelle]

@mpadge it seems we have an unresolved discussion above. 😸

[maelle]

TODO: rename field to "other main contributors"