chore: cull inactive permission holders sdk collaboration hub

[exploreriii]

Proposal to cull inactive permission holders (6+months) in sdk collaboration hub:

  - name: sdk-collaboration-hub
    teams:
      github-maintainers: maintain
      hiero-automation: write
      hiero-sdk-triage: triage
      sdk-collaboration-hub-committers: write
      sdk-collaboration-hub-maintainers: maintain
      security-maintainers: triage
      tsc: maintain
    visibility: public

just these teams:

  - name: sdk-collaboration-hub
    teams:
      sdk-collaboration-hub-committers: write
      sdk-collaboration-hub-maintainers: maintain
    visibility: public

[clowarden]

Validation succeeded

✅ The proposed configuration changes are valid!

Configuration changes

Directory

• naydenovn is no longer a maintainer of team sdk-collaboration-hub-committers
• nadineloepfe is no longer a maintainer of team sdk-collaboration-hub-committers
• RickyLB is no longer a maintainer of team sdk-collaboration-hub-committers
• SimiHunjan is no longer a maintainer of team sdk-collaboration-hub-maintainers

---

🔸 Please review the changes detected as they will be applied immediately once this PR is merged 🔸

[exploreriii]

/vote-sdkCollaborationHubMaintainers

[git-vote]

Vote created

@exploreriii has called for a vote on chore: cull inactive permission holders sdk collaboration hub (#715).

The members of the following teams have binding votes:

Team
@hiero-ledger/sdk-collaboration-hub-maintainers

Non-binding votes are also appreciated as a sign of support!

How to vote

You can cast your vote by reacting to this comment. The following reactions are supported:

In favor	Against	Abstain
👍	👎	👀

Please note that voting for multiple options is not allowed and those votes won't be counted.

The vote will be open for 14days. It will pass if at least 66.66% of the users with binding votes vote In favor 👍. Once it's closed, results will be published here as a new comment.

[git-vote]

Vote status

So far 0.00% of the users with binding vote are in favor and 0.00% are against (passing threshold: 66.66%).

Summary

In favor	Against	Abstain	Not voted
0	0	0	4

Binding votes (0)

User	Vote	Timestamp
@hendrikebbers	Pending
@SimiHunjan	Pending
@rwalworth	Pending
@ddeskov-limechain	Pending

[git-vote]

Vote status

So far 0.00% of the users with binding vote are in favor and 0.00% are against (passing threshold: 66.66%).

Summary

In favor	Against	Abstain	Not voted
0	0	0	4

Binding votes (0)

User	Vote	Timestamp
@hendrikebbers	Pending
@SimiHunjan	Pending
@rwalworth	Pending
@ddeskov-limechain	Pending

[git-vote]

Vote status

So far 0.00% of the users with binding vote are in favor and 0.00% are against (passing threshold: 66.66%).

Summary

In favor	Against	Abstain	Not voted
0	0	0	4

Binding votes (0)

User	Vote	Timestamp
@hendrikebbers	Pending
@SimiHunjan	Pending
@rwalworth	Pending
@ddeskov-limechain	Pending

[git-vote]

Vote status

So far 25.00% of the users with binding vote are in favor and 0.00% are against (passing threshold: 66.66%).

Summary

In favor	Against	Abstain	Not voted
1	0	0	3

Binding votes (1)

User	Vote	Timestamp
rwalworth	In favor	2026-08-27 16:58:44.0 +00:00:00
@hendrikebbers	Pending
@SimiHunjan	Pending
@ddeskov-limechain	Pending

[git-vote]

Vote status

So far 25.00% of the users with binding vote are in favor and 0.00% are against (passing threshold: 66.66%).

Summary

In favor	Against	Abstain	Not voted
1	0	0	3

Binding votes (1)

User	Vote	Timestamp
rwalworth	In favor	2026-08-27 16:58:44.0 +00:00:00
@hendrikebbers	Pending
@SimiHunjan	Pending
@ddeskov-limechain	Pending