MAINTAINERS: Add tpambor as collaborator

[tpambor]

Add myself as collaborator to native_sim area.

I would like to continue participating actively in the native_sim area. I also used native_sim together with sanitizers like UBSan to improve overall code quality, e.g. in network area see #90882.

Some evidence:

• drivers: hwinfo: native: report reset cause #95603
• serial: uart_native_pty: IRQ support #94478
• scripts: valgrind: suppress missing clean-up in nct_new_thread() #95229
• drivers: hwinfo: add HWINFO driver for native_sim #95437
• subsys/fs/fuse: Support using libfuse3 #96208
• tests native_sim reset_hw_info: Skip by now #96765
• boards native_sim: reboot: Do not close descriptors manually #96812
• native_simulator: Get latest from upstream  #96869
  -Race condition in NATIVE_SIM_REBOOT component #96809

[sonarqubecloud]

Quality Gate passed

Issues
0 New issues
0 Accepted issues

Measures
0 Security Hotspots
0.0% Coverage on New Code
0.0% Duplication on New Code

See analysis details on SonarQube Cloud

[kartben]

@aescolar unless the bot did something clearly wrong, which it didn't here, please don't re-assign :)

[aescolar]

@aescolar unless the bot did something clearly wrong, which it didn't here, please don't re-assign :)

@kartben
To document why I did that change:
Note that as per our process the gate to accept a contributor as new collaborator in an area is the area maintainer approval (in this case me).
Our merge criteria automation is based on the assignee approval + 1 extra person.
As such the logical thing would be to have those match or at least have that gate be ensured.

The current automation on PR assignment of the MAINTAINER file is just based on a mini area which includes (the whole) MAINTAINER file.

This is one of those cases where our assignee and merge criteria automation errs by being too simple.

Note that as maintainer or the affected area and release engineer I do have the right/responsibility to correct this when necessary.
And as such I corrected it.
Once I have approved it, I considered switching the assignee back to either/both @nashif and @MaureenHelm to ensure either of them as MAINTAINER file maintainer would also gate the merge, but a) I did not expect @MaureenHelm, @nashif or @stephanosio to object to this change, and b) in this case this is a contributor added as collaborator which, by our process, does not require TSC approval and therefore it seemed unnecessary to gate it by the current (or previous) TSC chair approval.