Note: we don't actually use gitter. It should probably be removed.

@Fishrock123 Fixed that, I'll admit, I was a bit over zealous in adding them in hopes that it would encourage more contributors to the various WG for visibility and such.

Do the localization groups use gitter? I'm not sure. None of the core groups do afaik, unless evangelism does.

There was length discussions on the website repo about which way we should go forward with gitter, and we figured it was actually best to stick to irc and keep everything together.

@Fishrock123 we (@iojs/iojs-es) use gitter (https://gitter.im/iojs/iojs-es) but i've heard of other groups using Slack and others IRC so there is no official communication channel for localization groups

Fair enough. Let's just remove chat links from the localization groups. If they advertise it on their repo's it is probably best and easiest. :)

@Fishrock123 All of the ones listed exist in gitter, meaning someone had created them after the repos were created.

I'm not concerned with what exists. We should probably list what the collaborators use. :)

@Fishrock123 @bnb @julianduque Good point, actually most of them are in use, It would be beneficial to list gitter/webIRC/whatever in this document, OR _somewhere else consolidated_ where we have a listing of all of the WGs and quick useful links for more visibility and hopefully more help into the individual WGs.

That being said, the iojs-XX i18n repos in this document have been rather glossed over--with the goal of getting more contributors and promoting the open governance model, it would help to provide what it is(ie. vietnamese, norsk, spanish) a link to what the collaborators use and issues at minimum (the elephant in the room being the assumption that a link to the repo is enough to achieve this for the i18n repos), if not also the contrib, governance, members links.

@blakmatrix, @kosamari has a document here that might be useful for this

@stringparser @kosamari Thanks!

@blakmatrix welcome! @kosamari has all the merit though ;)

@blakmatrix Quick note regarding Gitter chat rooms. They're automatically created as soon as a repo contributor visits (or some similar condition is met). The existence of a room is also less meaningful because there isn't an easy way to delete them.

@SVincent Yeah, I removed all the ones that weren't listed on the individual repos, all the i18n links come straight from the repo docs, plus I found a couple medium weekly's and twitters on a few that hadn't made it into the ReadMes. I made sure I wasn't just listing them because they existed after @Fishrock123 's comment. :) I hope there is a way we can list this doc on the site somehow, I think It'll be really useful for getting folks interested in the WG and their efforts.

I'd like us to try to try and cross-publish some of this stuff. Website wise it might work well to start with this list a "single page" article but, eventually, I'd like to see every (interested) WG have a landing page on the site.

nodejs/iojs.org#73 (comment)

Edit: I just imported the Markdown, as is, and it works pretty well inside the website. I'm contemplating syncing a few files like this from the various io.js groups this way in a semi-automated way. ... Or, we could make a website-specific variations and manage two variations of similar data. See nodejs/iojs.org#287 for "automatic syncing" of the external markdown content from GitHub.

@snostorm I think that's a good direction to strive for.

Honestly though, many of these WG only have one or a few people right now doing the work of translating, we can't assume what they know and know how to do, ie. if they know how to make a landing page or have the bandwidth for it, I mean one thing we often forget is how hard it is to understand git/github or any revision control system for that matter. We just don't know what we don't know about other groups and people.

We do know that io.js evangelism and the WG let "the world know how awesome io.js is and how to get involved." -- That's the goal of evangelism, while not necessarily the goal of each WG, as they may work on its own evangelism efforts or not, whether interest is involved or not, is something the individual WGs need to decide. As such we need to consider the open governance model and how best to accommodate.

The WG's may ultimately decide to host on a different domain separate from the iojs.org site, publish content on a different site (ex: http://blog.iojs.jp/), but from the end users perspective we need some kind of structure, and it makes the most sense to me that that lies in the realm of evangelisms WG as one of its purpose is to get users to know of and how to contribute to the other WGs.

It'd follow that if and when individual WGs may want to take on their own efforts for which evangelism serves, that they would then get involved in the evangelism WG serving their interests, it's also possible that they may just go their own way, it's up to them really, that's open governance.

This thread for a PR feels like it's getting a bit off topic... lets try and reign this in.

We should only point to each WG's primary GitHub repo. The README in each repo should contain information about the WG, the list of members, and how to best get involved. If they are using gitter, IRC, or carrier pidgeons the instructions on how to participate will be in the README.

@mikeal This is where it becomes difficult in the OG model, they are allowed to do whatever they see fit, right, "should contain information" simply becomes something someone else has impressed on their WG that they may or may not agree with.

The idea that relevant info will be in the README is a gross assumption on how their WG should work.

Perhaps we should only list links to what we assume is the WG primary repo. At least it's the effort of the larger WG to help trickle down what is assumed to be the right information, unfortunately that makes it somewhat harder for interested parties to discover the info they are looking for, I mean what we are looking at is an extra 1-4 more clicks anyways (or a click and no info at all), but easier maintenance in the long run.

@blakmatrix if there isn't a README, or the README contains little information, the best way to get them to care about making it relevant is to link to it :)

from the end users perspective we need some kind of structure, and it makes the most sense to me that that lies in the realm of evangelisms WG as one of its purpose is to get users to know of and how to contribute to the other WGs.

Exactly why I'd love to pull content like this in to iojs.org itself (as well). Discovery :)

LGTM

@blakmatrix please squash the commits and add a small summary in the commit message.
@mikeal could you LGTM as well?

LGTM

Going to squash and merge this soon unless further objections are made. I think stuff like this shouldn't linger this long :)

Thanks, landed in 73de135 with a fixup to add spaces between the english language name and the language name in parenthesis.