Expand CODEOWNERS to each learn section owner/advocate

[bmuenzenmeyer]

Broken out of #7197
Might be related to #7198

CODEOWNERS improvements associated to teams related to the APIs highlighted in the learn content

• Prerequisite Map and add frontmatter on learn pages tying to core apis #7294

for each identified api module / team:

• add a team, or expand access to write access if missing (CODEOWNERS must have write access)
• add the team and content paths to CODEOWNERS

[bmuenzenmeyer]

@AugustinMauroy identified these already

test-runner should be under the test-runner team
typescript should be under typescript team

[AugustinMauroy]

Note that we can only take action on this when we have clearly defined the learning path/graph and each subsection is associated with one or two teams max.

[AugustinMauroy]

I've added it to the agenda to get their opinion on the matter.

[marco-ippolito]

No problem with adding @nodejs/typescript as codeowner of the typescript related content for review

[AugustinMauroy]

ping @nodejs/test_runner to move forward on this issue

[pmarchini]

Hey @AugustinMauroy, no problem for me regarding @nodejs/test_runner.
I'd suggest collecting some thoughts from @cjihrig, @MoLow, @atlowChemi, and @jakecastelli as well.

[JakobJingleheimer]

ping @nodejs/test_runner to move forward on this issue

I'm happy to do, although I'm not as active an implementer as Chemi, Colin, and Moshe.

[cjihrig]

I'm not quite sure what is being asked of me in this issue? I think using the test_runner team as CODEOWNERS is fine if that's the question. It's worth noting though that none of the subsystem specific teams actually represent expertise in that subsystem. It just means that those people have subscribed to notifications.

[AugustinMauroy]

It just means that those people have subscribed to notifications.

And have to approve PRs

[pmarchini]

It just means that those people have subscribed to notifications.

And have to approve PRs

In Node Core, being part of the team does not grant any particular ownership.
It simply provides an easier way to manage notifications.
As far as I know, a team member's approval doesn't have any specific effect @AugustinMauroy.

[cjihrig]

Node core actually looked into leveraging CODEOWNERS years ago. That was exactly the problem though. Any collaborator can join any team and approve things... which defeats the whole purpose of CODEOWNERS.

[AugustinMauroy]

Node core actually looked into leveraging CODEOWNERS years ago. That was exactly the problem though. Any collaborator can join any team and approve things... which defeats the whole purpose of CODEOWNERS.

That another question. IDK if there are a way to disable self joining team. EDIT: we cannot "join as it" we can request to join. IDK who approve that but there are a step before joining any team

But for now we need someone that take care of nodejs learn content and it's why we use CODEOWNERS

[ovflowd]

That's not what @cjihrig meant, Augustin; Being added to a team might or might not require approval, but that's not the issue.

It is just that these people are not subject matter experts on these specific topics necessarily, but people that might be experts or not but that are interested in receiving notifications to PRs on Node.js Core related to said topics. Of course, the Node.js Bot pings said teams, but anyone can approve a PR (any collaborator) not exclusive to said team. There are cases of course where some PRs are requested either by some collaborators or the TSC to have an input from said "team".

I am still fine having this being the case for our CODEOWNERS, as we just want to notify that a change related to topic that touches said team is also being changed within the Website, and that might or might not be of interest of said "team".