Consider core consumer libraries for membership?

[lucascolley]

The governance document says:

A relevant open source project that falls under the scope of a Consortium API standard (existing or being developed). Currently this includes array/tensor and dataframe libraries. What "relevant" means is hard to quantify in a metric; this will be decided upon by the existing Members.

It also mentions how initial membership invitations went out to array and dataframe (producing) libraries.

Now that the focus for the array API standard is shifting towards adoption, does it make sense to invite members from array consuming libraries? I would say they count as "relevant open source projects which fall under the scope of [the standard]" at this stage.

---

As a sidenote, I think https://github.com/data-apis/governance/blob/main/members_and_sponsors.md is a bit outdated - for example, I think @betatim is missing.

[rgommers]

Yes definitely, we haven't updated this in quite a while! With the array API standard largely in good shape and updates focusing on pain points with adoption by consumer libraries, it makes perfect sense in my opinion to add array-consuming libraries.