Roles: Remove package template

[pllim]

This one might want to wait for when we officially retire the template in favor of OpenAstronomy, or should we go ahead?

• Package Next Steps package-template#519

Affected people in the removed listing:

• @larrybradley
• @Cadair
• @astrofrog
• @bsipocz

[eteq]

I think we absolutely need a role in the project that maintains this. I think we may want to re-imagine this as more like an "OA liason" though? But I think it's important we recognize that this is a real part of the project.

[pllim]

I think we absolutely need a role in the project that maintains this.

@eteq , what is your concrete proposal? Remove this role, add this other role you want and state it as Unfilled ?

[pllim]

I am still of the opinion that this role should be removed until we have a concrete plan w.r.t. template coordination with OpenAstronomy and people who actually have time to do the work. I already archived package-template, so the existing description no longer applies.

[mhvk]

I agree with @pllim that the role as described is gone, so it should be removed. I do also agree with @eteq that we should have a role like this (even if just for a transition document), but given that we have neither a role description nor a volunteer, I think that should be a separate issue -- no reason not to remove a defunct role just because we need a similar one (unless of course someone adds a description and volunteers for the role in the next day or two).

[hamogu]

I agree with @mhvk : We should remove this role for now. If someone (e.g. @eteq ) then they can suggest a new role (ideally with a person to fill it) they can open a new PR.