Self-Recommendation of nomination to @nodejs/web-infra

[avivkeller]

Per our nomination guidelines, members of the @nodejs/web team can recommend users for nomination to @nodejs/web-infra. However, final approvals must come from @nodejs/tsc and/or @nodejs/build.

In line with this process, I’d like to formally recommend myself for nomination to @nodejs/web-infra.

---

My initial nomination (nodejs/nodejs.org#7208) faced a private objection, but more than seven months have passed, and I’m hopeful that now a recommendation may lead to a second, and hopefully successful, nomination.

Why

There are a few key reasons I believe joining @nodejs/web-infra would be a natural next step:

1. CODEOWNERS
   I’m currently the top human contributor to nodejs/api-docs-tooling, yet I don’t have CODEOWNERS status on the files I’ve helped maintain and improve¹. In my opinion, formal membership would help align responsibility with contribution, and give the power to approve² changes to these files.

2. Infrastructure & Vercel Access
   My work often involves infrastructure changes, like migrating from Jest to node:test, setting up Playwright, building generators, and more. When issues arise (e.g., Vercel failures), I’d like the ability to access logs and help diagnose problems more directly as a @nodejs/web-infra member.

3. Broader Involvement
   I've been involved across multiple teams in the Node.js org:

   • Started with @nodejs/issue-triage
   • Joined @nodejs/test-runner, where I helped to improve glob support
   • Switched to @nodejs/nodejs-website, where I developed UI components, generators, etc.
   • Joined @nodejs/userland-migrations, where I helped to develop and review codemods.

   Now, I’m eager to take on a larger role³ and continue deepening my contributions to the project’s future.

Contribution Overview

Repository	PRs	Issues
Node.js Organization	Authored · Commented	Authored · Commented
nodejs/nodejs.org	Authored · Commented	Authored · Commented
nodejs/api-docs-tooling	Authored · Commented	Authored · Commented
nodejs/node	Authored · Commented	Authored · Commented
nodejs/help	Authored · Commented	Authored · Commented

Objections may be made on this issue, or to me directly via Slack. If you wish to proxy your objection, please reach out to the Website Admins, @ovflowd and @bmuenzenmeyer, or the TSC Chair.

---

As a reminder, this is only a recommendation. It cannot be approved, and still requires a formal nomination.

Footnotes

1. With invaluable support from the @nodejs/nodejs-website and @nodejs/web-infra teams. ↩

2. Currently, while I can approve, I still need @nodejs/web-infra to also approve. ↩

3. Of course, all roles in the project are meaningful ↩

[bjohansebas]

big +1 :)

[flakey5]

Unfortunately there's currently a block on this nomination as well due to a couple of reasons. While I unfortunately can't disclose all of them right now, two that I can are:

1. Despite the web-team repo and its contents being transferred to the Node.js org, the governance file this nomination is based upon is different from the one present in the website repo (the original source of truth), and I don't believe anyone on the website team actually approved or even reviewed the changes (even though it really just looks like things were just reworded & reorganized).
2. While this is technically a recommendation as you stated, it reads (and is titled as) a nomination, which only TSC or Build members can do.

[avivkeller]

Despite the web-team repo and its contents being transferred to the Node.js org, the governance file this nomination is based upon is different from the one present in the website repo (the original source of truth), and I don't believe anyone on the website team actually approved or even reviewed the changes (even though it really just looks like things were just reworded & reorganized).

You're right, the language was slightly revised. My intention was for those updates to be reviewed as part of the repo transfer, but I realize that I didn’t make that expectation clear. That was my oversight. However, I don’t believe it should block the recommendation, especially given that the original governance file also states: “members of the Node.js Web Team might also recommend people for nomination.”

While this is technically a recommendation as you stated, it reads (and is titled as) a nomination, which only TSC or Build members can do.

I titled and explained the issue poorly. To clarify: this is a recommendation. If accepted, a TSC or Build member would still need to formally carry out the nomination.

While I unfortunately can't disclose all of them right now

Understood. If you're able to share anything that would help me address the concerns or take steps toward resolving them, I’d really appreciate it.