The results are only worth reading if they are not for sale. This is written down before anyone has a reason to ask.
The project currently has one maintainer, @DeviousCardi, who has commit access and decides what merges. That is a starting point, not a target: a project with one maintainer has a bus factor of one, and this file exists so growing past that happens by a stated process rather than by whoever shows up first getting write access.
- Several substantive pull requests merged — a check with a real citation, an adapter re-confirmed by hand, or a runner fix, not typo corrections.
- A public proposal, as an issue on this repository, naming the person and what they have contributed.
- No standing maintainer objects within two weeks.
Removal follows the same shape: a public issue, a reason, two weeks for
objection. A maintainer who has been inactive for two consecutive quarterly
reruns (docs/BACKENDS.md's checklist, run by .github/workflows/matrix.yml)
is asked directly before being proposed for removal, not removed by default —
absence is not the same as disagreement.
A maintainer employed by, or paid by, a vendor whose backend appears in the matrix declares it in this file, in the table below. A maintainer with a declared interest in a vendor:
- Does not adjudicate a case (
ADJUDICATION.md) where that vendor's backend is the reference implementation or the backend under dispute. - Does not merge a pull request that changes that vendor's adapter, files a
finding against it, or resolves a
divergenceissue about it — review and approval come from another maintainer. - May still write cases, fix the runner, and do everything else a maintainer does; the recusal is scoped to decisions about the vendor they are affiliated with, not a blanket exclusion.
An affiliation is declared before the maintainer takes any of the actions above, not after being asked about it.
| Maintainer | Vendor | Relationship |
|---|---|---|
| (none declared) |
None. If that changes, the amount and source are added to
README.md, not only here — a reader deciding whether
to trust a result should not have to find this file to learn who paid for it.
This covers who decides what merges and who may declare a vendor conflict of
interest away from a decision. It does not cover the rule for what a check
may assert, which is AGENTS.md's "Adjudication" section and made
operational in ADJUDICATION.md; it does not cover how a
backend maintainer disputes a specific published verdict, which is
.github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/divergence.md.