Update OWNERS

[juliusvonkohout]

Reduce to active maintainers, since most new contributors are confused if maintainers do not respond, but are listed in their PRs as approvers.

The latest commit from the removed approvers is 3 years old 7f8e6d8

CC @andreyvelich and KSC

CC @kubeflow/wg-manifests-leads @kimwnasptd @rimolive

Here is an example of the problem:

[google-oss-prow]

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: juliusvonkohout

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

The pull request process is described here

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

• OWNERS [juliusvonkohout]

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

[juliusvonkohout]

@elikatsis
@PatrickXYS
@StefanoFioravanzo
@yanniszark

Since you did not contribute as maintainer in the last 3 years AFAIK, are you still active or do you want to become active again in the near future in this repository?

[juliusvonkohout]

@jbottum @johnugeorge @terrytangyuan what do you think?

[juliusvonkohout]

i am also looking at getting maybe @kromanow94 and other active contributors as subproject maintainers in the long term. I think whoever contributes in some way consistently is a good candidate.

[johnugeorge]

LGTM @juliusvonkohout

[elikatsis]

Hello, thanks for tackling this.

In kubeflow/kubeflow we've introduced the concept of emeritus approvers (which is a common practice). Would it make sense to do it here as well? See kubeflow/kubeflow#7402

[rimolive]

/lgtm

[juliusvonkohout]

Hello, thanks for tackling this.

In kubeflow/kubeflow we've introduced the concept of emeritus approvers (which is a common practice). Would it make sense to do it here as well? See kubeflow/kubeflow#7402

Done in #2630

[StefanoFioravanzo]

/lgtm