feat(meta): require collaborators to be active

[avivkeller]

Fixes #7767

The wording can be changed as needed.

Requires a READ_ONLY_PUBLIC_REPO_TOKEN with:

• public_repo (for opening the issue)
• read:org (for checking team membership)

[vercel]

The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for Git ↗︎

Name	Status	Preview	Updated (UTC)
nodejs-org	✅ Ready (Inspect)	Visit Preview	May 23, 2025 8:35pm

[codecov-commenter]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 75.33%. Comparing base (39e3ae1) to head (de47182).

✅ All tests successful. No failed tests found.

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #7775      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   75.31%   75.33%   +0.01%     
==========================================
  Files          96       96              
  Lines        7856     7856              
  Branches      192      192              
==========================================
+ Hits         5917     5918       +1     
+ Misses       1938     1937       -1     
  Partials        1        1              

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• 📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.

[avivkeller]

Is this too many unit tests? I may have gotten carried away...

[Copilot]

Pull Request Overview

Adds automation to identify and report inactive collaborators, updates documentation to clarify collaborator maintenance, and schedules a periodic workflow.

• Introduces a script that searches for collaborator activity over a configurable timeframe and files or updates an issue listing inactive members
• Provides comprehensive tests for all new utilities and workflows
• Extends CONTRIBUTING.md with a “Maintaining Collaborator Status” section and adds a GitHub Actions workflow to run the script weekly

Reviewed Changes

Copilot reviewed 4 out of 4 changed files in this pull request and generated 3 comments.

File	Description
apps/site/scripts/find-inactive-collaborators/index.mjs	New script to detect inactive collaborators and create/update an issue
apps/site/scripts/find-inactive-collaborators/tests/index.test.mjs	Tests covering date utilities, activity checks, issue creation/update, and full workflow
CONTRIBUTING.md	Added “Maintaining Collaborator Status” section and fixed link case
.github/workflows/find-inactive-collaborators.yml	Scheduled GitHub Actions workflow to invoke the script weekly

Comments suppressed due to low confidence (1)

CONTRIBUTING.md:6

• There’s an extra hyphen and inconsistent indentation before the 'Becoming a collaborator' entry, which breaks the list structure; remove the redundant '-' to fix formatting.

-  - [Becoming a collaborator]

[MattIPv4]

This feels very odd to put inside the site app when it is an entirely meta thing to the repo/organisation, nothing to do with the production site?

[avivkeller]

I just figured I'd put it in the same directory as lighthouse, but I can move it.

[AugustinMauroy]

maybe put ~/scripts instead of ~/.github/scripts not to hide this script

[avivkeller]

Why? .github/scripts makes sense, since this is only used by GitHub Actions

[ovflowd]

I'm fine with .github/scripts, but this format I've never seen before. I'd rather embedding a minimal script directly on the YAML, or publish this script as an Action step itself :)

[ovflowd]

This feels very odd to put inside the site app when it is an entirely meta thing to the repo/organisation, nothing to do with the production site?

I agree. But at the same time, there's no such... hmm.. meta repo for the website team or web-infra team, so no idea where this should live. @bmuenzenmeyer we could create a repo on nodejs/web-team as a meta space for the website and web-infra teams.

[avivkeller]

WDYT about storing a list of the current members in the GOVERNANCE file?

That would eliminate the need to use a custom token, and we could just use the default actions token?

(This is what is done in core)

[MattIPv4]

Fwiw, I'm fine with this living in .github/scripts -- I think this repo is still canonically the right place, and that directory seems like a logical location to me 👍

[MattIPv4]

WDYT about storing a list of the current members in the GOVERNANCE file?

This does seem easier than needing a custom token. I do wonder if something should be done more centrally to have all the (public) teams in code somewhere.

[bmuenzenmeyer]

We have a monorepo now. It would be easy to make a module here that only serves as a tooling/scripts location.

Heck, api-docs-tooling could even migrate.
The more we add to the monorepo the more value it (theoretically) provides

[ovflowd]

We have a monorepo now. It would be easy to make a module here that only serves as a tooling/scripts location.

Heck, api-docs-tooling could even migrate. The more we add to the monorepo the more value it (theoretically) provides

I don't think the website repo should be a "fit everything" in one repository. There should be separation of concerns IMO. And I do prefer having a meta-repo for the administrative side of things of the web teams.