Does anyone want these contributions to keep RSE alive?
I don't think the opinion of others should be used as a criterion here. The thing is that if Nick, Rob or whoever have authored good patches, it's still better to contribute them into the project, independently of what others want to
do or not with RSE. No-one is allowed to claim that a project is dead if it still has contributors/contributions. If the patches are proposed and seem good but don't get merged for other non-technical reason and contributors are still interested in getting
those patches merged, then it's worth an escalation plan to turn contributors into committers.
In general, having people authoring commits can be seen as a sign that at least those who did the work probably have interest in authoring the commits, ie keeping RSE alive in that case. So to me, whenever there is a contribution, it
shows that the project can still be perceived as alive and that no other discussion is necessary before applying the typical EDP processes to make sure project can be as successful as contributors can make it.
To sum up, we don't need to discuss RSE state any more, the patches authored by Rob and Nick can be a sufficient sign that RSE is still alive and we just have to make sure the efforts stored on a GitHub branch can be turned into activity
in the origin code base if committers want it.