Complete maintainers' guide

[waldyrious]

This PR completes the work initiated in #1839, and closes #1209. /cc @agnivade, @sbrl. I'd also love to get feedback from @jsonbruce and @pxgamer, who are our newest collaborators since #1885 :)

Note: I've split the commits into a logical progression, to make the changes easier to review.

[agnivade]

Very nice :)

[owenvoke]

Looks good to me. 👍

[waldyrious]

Thanks for the reviews. Please don't merge yet, I will add the template messages as discussed in #1878.

[waldyrious]

Update: I started adding the template messages in maintainers-guide.md, but it ended up getting too long. I decided to take a different approach:

• reduced the scope of GOVERNANCE.md to cover only the community interaction guidelines;
• combined the second section of GOVERNANCE.md (about the criteria for role transitions), the entire contents of MAINTAINERS.md (about the performers of role transitions), and the new content including the template messages (about procedures for role transitions) into a single file, COMMUNITY-ROLES.md.

This hopefully makes GOVERNANCE.md more compact and readable, and reduces fragmentation of the information about community roles, which was going to be split across 3 files.

In addition, I also removed the ambiguity regarding in the term "maintainer", which was used to mean both "repository collaborator with commit access" and "organization owner". It now means only the former.

Again, please review the commits individually to ensure each change makes sense in context.

[sbrl]

Looks ok to me! 👍 Curious as to why the contents of MAINTAINERS.md has been moved to the bottom of COMMUNITY-ROLES.md, though.

[waldyrious]

Curious as to why the contents of MAINTAINERS.md has been moved to the bottom of COMMUNITY-ROLES.md, though.

No particular reason, I just thought it made sense to present the sequence in the "when --> how --> who" order.

But now that I think of it, I also like the fact that this order gives more prominence to the processes and guidelines, than to the people. I think that's important if we want a community that's encourages collaboration and is as self-managing as possible.

Besides, the part of the list that is useful for, say, third parties reaching out to the tldr-pages organization, is both linkable via its section header anchor, and equivalent to the listing at https://github.com/orgs/tldr-pages/people, which is public and easily accessible. So I don't see any downsides of that list being at the bottom of the file. Do let me know if you disagree with any of this, though.

[agnivade]

LGTM

[maxsxu]

It's really a great job. Thanks~ @waldyrious

[waldyrious]

Great, thanks for the reviews guys 👍 I'll go ahead and merge this now, given the multiple approvals (and no objections).

Later on I will submit small changes as a separate PR, which are needed to account for the limitations I found while performing role changes at the organization level. More details in this comment.