Such lists / links should probably end up on each team's wiki page (mostly on mediawiki.org)

Please not, https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Developers/Maintainers exists for this purpose. Further redundancy will make things worse.

Thank you Nemo! Sorry, I should have listed that page initially as I'm aware of it.
I've added it to the task description now.

I created this task as I'm wondering in the long run about a better way to allow viewing and keeping up-to-date information about code areas and their maintainers (both "who maintains this code area" and "which code areas does this maintainer/team maintain" and having these two views makes it more complicated) not scattered in several places. Hence same problem I see...

I just updated the description with what I know right now.

I plan to consolidate all of these on the [[mw:Developers/Maintainers]] page at some point in the not terribly distant future (like, in a week or so). I plan to add a "Relevant WMF Team" (or such) column there to fill in to not step over the other maintainers in the list. And, try to make it sortable as well.

@Legoktm what are your thoughts on that (where "that" == adding another column as proposed in T1287#1759463)?

In T115854#2548776, @greg wrote:

I plan to consolidate all of these on the [[mw:Developers/Maintainers]] page at some point in the not terribly distant future (like, in a week or so). I plan to add a "Relevant WMF Team" (or such) column there to fill in to not step over the other maintainers in the list. And, try to make it sortable as well.

@Legoktm what are your thoughts on that (where "that" == adding another column as proposed in T1287#1759463)?

I would recommend attaching "as of" dates. Teams and responsibilities shift around as time passes, of course. In my experience, it can be helpful with a chart like this to know whether a maintainer is as of August 2016 or as of January 2013 to gauge how accurate the info is.

In T115854#2550107, @MZMcBride wrote:

I would recommend attaching "as of" dates. Teams and responsibilities shift around as time passes, of course. In my experience, it can be helpful with a chart like this to know whether a maintainer is as of August 2016 or as of January 2013 to gauge how accurate the info is.

+1, good call.

In T115854#2548776, @greg wrote:

I plan to consolidate all of these on the [[mw:Developers/Maintainers]] page at some point in the not terribly distant future (like, in a week or so). I plan to add a "Relevant WMF Team" (or such) column there to fill in to not step over the other maintainers in the list. And, try to make it sortable as well.

@Legoktm what are your thoughts on that (where "that" == adding another column as proposed in T1287#1759463)?

I would prefer just including them as the actual maintainers, if in fact they are maintaining the extension rather than making WMF teams appear special. I think having a "as of" is a good idea too.

In T115854#2566289, @Legoktm wrote:

I would prefer just including them as the actual maintainers, if in fact they are maintaining the extension rather than making WMF teams appear special.

Fair 'nough! I'll obviously not remove any names but add the relevant WMF team (also, boy does that make it way easier to add this info instead of modifying the /Row and /ComponentRow templates....)

In T115854#2548776, @greg wrote:

And, try to make it sortable as well.

This part is done, easily enough: https://www.mediawiki.org/w/index.php?title=Developers%2FMaintainers%2FHeader&type=revision&diff=2218396&oldid=2215233

Discovery: done
Reading: kinda done (still need to fix up the stuff up in the MW Core section)

In T115854#2566294, @greg wrote:

In T115854#2548776, @greg wrote:

And, try to make it sortable as well.

This part is done, easily enough: https://www.mediawiki.org/w/index.php?title=Developers%2FMaintainers%2FHeader&type=revision&diff=2218396&oldid=2215233

It kind of works but fails due to the two rows per thing for the description column. If we could merge those it'd be better :/

For the record, other places where this information has historically been (tried to be) tracked:

• Extension blame map (gdoc) - last edited July 26th, 2016 (as of today, of course)
• MediaWiki Component Ownership (gdoc) - last edited April 10th, 2015

Data from these should be merged and then these documents should be marked as deprecated in favor of mw:Developers/Maintainers.

In T115854#2576532, @greg wrote:

• Extension blame map (gdoc) - last edited July 26th, 2016 (as of today, of course)

Archived at https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:2016_extension_blame_map_-_Extensions_and_skins.pdf , please blank the gdoc and replace with a link.

• MediaWiki Component Ownership (gdoc) - last edited April 10th, 2015

Please archive on Commons before it vanishes like all staff gdocs.

Today: https://www.mediawiki.org/w/index.php?title=Developers%2FMaintainers&type=revision&diff=2242907&oldid=2222693
Did:

• Collaboration
• VE
• Multimedia
• Language
• Parsing
• RelEng

That's all I got from the wiki pages.

Next step: reconcile with https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1e25O69JxLPYBrwunDDLFGM80eFQuTzghY0EsvvgQR0s/edit#gid=0 (Extension blame map). The other gdoc I linked above is so old I don't plan to look at it too closely.

In T115854#2591093, @Nemo_bis wrote:

• MediaWiki Component Ownership (gdoc) - last edited April 10th, 2015

Please archive on Commons before it vanishes like all staff gdocs.

Done: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:MediaWiki_Component_Ownership.pdf

Also,
Lots of progress has been made on mw:Dev/Maint since last comment here: https://www.mediawiki.org/w/index.php?title=Developers%2FMaintainers&type=revision&diff=2428822&oldid=2254169

@Aklapper: you opened this task. Is the use and current state of mw:Dev/Maint (since I resolved T141066 today) sufficient for this?

Done: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:MediaWiki_Component_Ownership.pdf

Thanks!