Repository: asyncapi/community
Author: princerajpoot20
Hey folks,
As part of the 2026 Goals (More details: https://github.com/asyncapi/community/issues/2085#issuecomment-3405385696), we will discuss here regarding Strategy S1.
`S1: Repository Audit & Consolidation (Targets O1, O2): Conduct a clear audit of all 49 repositories to identify active maintainers, consolidate inactive repos, and identify critical ones. Move inactive maintainers to an Emeritus role.`
I have started working on S1 and would like to get feedback on the proposed approach.
The main question is: on what basis do we decide whether someone is an active maintainer?
I’ve drafted criteria to determine whether a maintainer is active in a repository.
The proposed rules are:
1. Commits — The maintainer has made at least one commit to the repository (on the default branch).
2. Merged pull requests — The maintainer has opened a PR that was merged into the repository.
3. PR reviews — The maintainer has reviewed at least one PR that was eventually merged (e.g., approval or substantive review).
`At least one` of these criteria should be met `within the past 1 year.`
This helps determine whether the maintainer has performed any relevant activity in the repository during that period.
I have intentionally not included rules related to issues. My reasoning is that valid issues typically lead to some form of change in the repository, which would be reflected through PR activity—either by creating or reviewing a PR. While I agree that not all issues require a PR for resolution, this is true in the majority of cases.
If a maintainer has no PR-related activity in the past year, it may also indicate other insights—for example, that the repository may not require active maintenance. Such repositories can be re-reviewed manually again. We will take help from GitHub Insights and [LFX Insights](https://insights.linuxfoundation.org/project/asyncapi)
Please let me know your thoughts on this approach and whether it sounds reasonable, or if you have any suggestions for improving this evaluation criteria.
cc: @asyncapi/maintainers @asyncapi/tsc_members