What order does all contributors bot add people?

[KirstieJane]

I think from playing around that it is just adding people in the order that you've added them.

I'm not very clear how I would re-arrange them? I can manually re-order the json file, but if I'm using the bot how would I "re-run" the bot to build the table?

Thank you for the really incredible tool, I've been a fan of the emoji key for years but the bot is so so so freaking cool. I absolutely love it 💓 🤖 🚀 🌟

[Berkmann18]

The table follows the array in order. What I mean by that is that the order of contributors in the list in .all-contributorsrc will be reflected on the table. Also the bot, automatically (re)generates the table so you don't have to worry about that.

[jakebolam]

Hey @KirstieJane thanks for the feedback. You are doing some cool stuff at the Turing Institute!

As Berkmann18 mentioned this comes from the order of the contributors array. We have been thinking about better ways of representing this, but nothing is started yet (e.g. order by most recent contributions, add a featured section 'contributor of the week' etc). If you have ideas we are all ears. (cc @gr2m)

For regenerating the table this would be a cool feature to add to the bot. @bot please refresh the table. Feel free to create a feature request on the bot-repo

I think for now if you run @bot please add @KirstieJane for code where the User and Contribution already exists. Then the bot will just end up refreshing the table for you.

[KirstieJane]

Hi @Berkmann18 and @jakebolam! Thank you so much for the answers!

I love the advice to just re-enter someone in the table and it will re-generate. That's a great workaround for fixing the order - thank you 🚀

I think the current behaviour of each new name being added to the end of the list so that the table is in order of "when someone first contributed to the project" is a totally sensible default.

In our case I'm trying to get us all in alphabetical order because I'm trying to reject the idea that "near the beginning" is more important than "near the end" which is better than "lost in the middle". And I'm also trying to push back against the idea that longevity carries more weight than new contributions.

I'll go ahead and add the feature request you recommend (it isn't a high priority, but fun to add) and I'll open a new issue with ideas for ordering the contributors.

Thanks again so much for your help! 👾 🤖 🤗

[jakebolam]

Thanks, @KirstieJane these are great points!

Another idea we were toying with was completely randomizing it each time, do you think this would help?

[KirstieJane]

So my personal opinion on randomizing is that it would feel rather chaotic. I feel like I'd look at a table and think "everything's changed" rather than seeing "oh there's a new contributor - how cool!"

I think you could put a new person in at a random point, so instead of going at the start or finish they'd just slot in somewhere?? That wouldn't look chaotic - some folks would just move along one step - and might get around the order effects!

[Berkmann18]

@KirstieJane You're most welcome. An alphabetical listing seems to be a great idea.

[iamhectorsosa]

Is there any reason why we aren't able to sort this table by number of contributions. If I understand correctly, the table is generated based on time added and there is also an option to sort alphabetically.

However, I do think that for some projects it makes sense to sort this list by number of contributions. Is this something that is being considered?

[gr2m]

if you want to contribute it, go ahead, pull requests welcome