Wondering if @bd808 could shed some light on this

In T254637#6386904, @Aklapper wrote:

Wondering if @bd808 could shed some light on this

The data used on the admin tool's tool comes from several sources, but yes the detailed information is provided by the API of Hay's Directory. There are two ways for you to public data into Hay's Directory:

1. Create a toolinfo record for your tool using https://toolsadmin.wikimedia.org/tools/. Each tool you maintain will be listed there. Clicking into the details of a tool will allow you to create or edit a toolinfo record for your tool. I would call this the "preferred" way for a Toolforge tool to publish this information.
2. Follow the instructions at https://hay.toolforge.org/directory/#addtool to register the URL of a toolinfo.json data file you have manually created and published.

For those who are curious how data managed in https://toolsadmin.wikimedia.org ends up in Hay's Directory and the admin tool, Striker (toolsadmin) publishes a toolinfo.json file containing the maintainer provided data for all tools it has been told about (https://toolsadmin.wikimedia.org/tools/toolinfo/v1/toolinfo.json) and this URL is registered with Hay's Directory.

Thanks for the info!
Are these two options documented somewhere on-wiki?
If I created a new tool, is there some nudging in place that I really shall create a toolinfo record / toolinfo.json file?
Does any kind of vague idea (task) already exist to make maintainers of existing tools add such info if missing, e.g. public call to action on mailing list, explicitly contacting maintainers via email (if their addresses are stored somewhere)?

The reason for this ticket is that I'd like potential new contributors to an existing tool to be able to find its code base and its issue tracker, plus in case of maintainers being AWOL / not reachable, nobody who is willing to take over maintainership can use their right to fork if they cannot find out where the codebase is located.

In T254637#6401816, @Aklapper wrote:

Thanks for the info!
Are these two options documented somewhere on-wiki?

Maybe? But probably not in any highly visible way. Hay announced his directory and the toolinfo.json file way back in 2014 (https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/labs-l/2014-August/002801.html), but I don't know that it has ever been well documented in the Wikitech help pages.

If I created a new tool, is there some nudging in place that I really shall create a toolinfo record / toolinfo.json file?

Yes, the new tool creation process happens in Striker and creating a basic toolinfo record is part of the automated actions based on the creation of a tool. There is are merged but not yet deployed update to this process that I hope will also make it more clear to the users what is happening and why.

Does any kind of vague idea (task) already exist to make maintainers of existing tools add such info if missing, e.g. public call to action on mailing list, explicitly contacting maintainers via email (if their addresses are stored somewhere)?

The user interface in Striker prompts for creation of a toolinfo record when viewing the details screen of a legacy tool. There is currently no task that I know of to promote wider adoption. I expect that once Toolhub is functional we would do some communications push and follow up campaign to get folks to populate it.

The reason for this ticket is that I'd like potential new contributors to an existing tool to be able to find its code base and its issue tracker, plus in case of maintainers being AWOL / not reachable, nobody who is willing to take over maintainership can use their right to fork if they cannot find out where the codebase is located.

+100