Updating people page to link to the github contributors list

[ksen0]

Topic

Hi!

I’m Kit, and I’ve joined the Processing Foundation recently as project lead for p5.js.
I am so excited to be part of this amazing community.

I'm opening this issue to find out what you think about attribution on the People page of the p5.js website.

The p5.js project uses the All-Contributors specification, which is kept up to date on the github README: https://github.com/processing/p5.js/?tab=readme-ov-file#contributors

This list then is manually transferred to the People page: https://p5js.org/people/

In the current version, you can see all the contributor names when you scroll down.

I'm wondering if people would feel alright with rather creating a prominent link to the list in the GitHub README? I imagine a page like this, with a short text introducing the contributor attribution policy, and then a link/button to go to the list:

This proposal would replace the long list at the bottom of that page. Additionally, every page that currently likes "p5.js contributors" to the people page would actually link to the GitHub repository that lists all the contributors.

Looking forward to hear opinions on current vs proposed version, or other proposals of how to provide credit to p5.js contributors on the website!

[kjhollen]

I like this proposal! The contributor list on GitHub includes instructions for how someone can add themselves, which feels welcoming. It feels good to call attention to the wider community before PF staff on the p5.js people page, too—I think this makes the People page on the p5.js site feel less hierarchical while still making it clear who is & has been accountable for the leadership of the project.

For similar reasons, I think it would great to link to the GitHub contributors section in the main repo's README from the "p5.js contributors" attribution link, instead of the p5.js people page. There are many types of contributions that span multiple modes or can't be represented through git history in a single (or any) repository, but this gives people a way to be visible in the project regardless.

[calebfoss]

I'll articulate the effect of this structure through an analogy.

A friend of mine was an extra in a Batman movie. It was fun to try to spot her in the crowd on screen. Then, when the credits rolled, we through the cast, listing the big name stars first, then the smaller roles, and then finally extras, who were categorized into general groups like "football fans". The list of names was long, so we paused to find her name. It was a fun and cute moment when we located it.

The current setup of the people page very much reminds me of this. The Leads, Mentors, and Alumni get top billing with their profiles taking up large portions of the page. The rest of the names are not organized (I believe they are in the order in which they were added to the list), so even if you do scroll down to the bottom of the page to the list, you will likely need to use ctrl+f to find someone.

The all contributors list in the readme includes cute emojis representing general categories of contributions (kind of like "football fans" in the Batman movie) for some contributors. On the people page, this is completely absent.

So I think something to consider is whether this stars vs extras hierarchy is a fit for how you want contributors to feel about their role in the project. I suspect part of the reason no one in the "extras" category has commented on this issue since it was opened 2 months ago is that the presence of a fast forward button to the extras credits does not significantly change this dynamic.

I think it is much, much more meaningful and impactful when contributors are recognized for their specific work:

• Google Summer of Code project write ups
• Fellowship write ups
• Attribution for creators on Community Sketches
• Attribution for writers on Tutorials
• Attribution for developers on Libraries
• Attribution for creators on Examples on the old website (currently missing from the new website)
• Shout outs in releases for contributors whose PRs are included

In contrast to the all contributors list, these open up opportunities for people to discover others' skills and creative practices. For example, in #415, I noted that WM Harris is credited for the example she created on the old website but not included on the new website or on the all contributors list. Looking at her example prompted me to check out her art practice, which has been very rewarding. As her bio describes, Harris "uses code as a medium for engaging discussions as a Black woman in American culture". I strongly recommend checking out the online documentation of her work.

If you would like to improve visibility for contributor recognition, my suggestion would be to seek out more opportunities to celebrate their specific work. For example, imagine a rotating Contributor profile section on the home page. You could include a headshot and profile describing the contributor's relationship to the project and their work. This would be a great opportunity to highlight contributions that do not fit into the bulleted list above.