[jeffpaul]

What

This pull request adds documentation to clarify contribution and maintenance procedures for the WP-Bench project. The most important changes are the addition of a new contributing guide and the inclusion of maintainer information in the README.md.

Documentation improvements:

• Added a new CONTRIBUTING.md file outlining guidelines for merging and closing PRs, as well as instructions for joining the maintainers team.
• Updated README.md to list current maintainers and provide a link to the maintainers team for contact purposes.

Why

Verification

• ruff check python
• mypy python
• pytest python
• PHP syntax / runtime smoke test (when runtime/ changed)

Score impact

• This PR does not change how any test is scored, or
• This PR changes scoring/dataset/runtime behavior — bump the relevant
  version (scoring_version, suite version, or runtime version), and
  note below whether new scores are comparable to previous runs.

[github-actions]

The following accounts have interacted with this PR and/or linked issues. I will continue to update these lists as activity occurs.

If you're merging code through a pull request on GitHub, copy and paste the following into the bottom of the merge commit message.

Co-authored-by: jeffpaul <jeffpaul@git.wordpress.org>
Co-authored-by: lezama <migueluy@git.wordpress.org>

To understand the WordPress project's expectations around crediting contributors, please review the Contributor Attribution page in the Core Handbook.

---

Props Bot commands

You can trigger Props Bot actions by commenting on this PR:

• @propsbot add <username> to give props to a GitHub user. Requires write access.
• @propsbot remove <username> to leave a user out of the props. Requires write access.
• @propsbot refresh to refresh this list. Adding the props-bot label works too.

[lezama]

lgtm, two small things: non-maintainers can't merge without write access, so maybe "a maintainer merges it" instead of "you are free to merge". and the CODEOWNERS from #74 only has the global fallback, so the "specific section" bit doesn't exist yet, fine to leave it if we plan to add sections

[jeffpaul]

I made edits for that first change. For the second, the thinking was they could @mention the maintainer group or @mention a specific maintainer.