Thanks for weighin in, I will call a vote in the upcoming few days (a bit busy today and want to make sure I summarise the situation right, so it will take me some time). My current thinking about this is that the best course would be to have 3 options - roughly “promote posteriordb without further conditions”, “promote posteriordb if it will be more tightly aligned with the Stan core” and “do not promote posteriordb”. The voting process is (intentionally so far) unclear on how to handle multiple options, but my preferred variant for this case would be that if any gets more than 50% votes it is selected, otherwise there will be a second round among the top two options.
As I said, I will take some time to make sure I summarise stuff well and that the formulations make sense. If you have any feedback on the rough sketch above or if you want to consult on the exact wording, let me know.