Re: [boost] [date_time] Who is in charge?

Subject: Re: [boost] [date_time] Who is in charge?
From: Olaf van der Spek (ml_at_[hidden])
Date: 2012-07-18 11:33:31

On Sun, Jul 8, 2012 at 1:46 AM, Stewart, Robert <Robert.Stewart_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>> Boost does not appear to have a policy for maintainers that
>> go missing in action.
>
> We have this policy, which is half of the equation:
>
> http://www.boost.org/development/submissions.html#Lifecycle
>
>> I think someone (maybe steering committe) should come up with
>> some policy.
>
> This sounded awfully familiar, so I checked.  I'm supposed to write up something like the following and post it to the web site:
>
> "When a Boost library maintainer becomes unresponsive, the following process provides a means to take over maintenance:
>
> "1. Identify the maintainer of the code that is languishing.
> "2. Appeal to the maintainer, by name, in a properly targeted message to the developer's list (with the right '[library]' tag in the subject line).
> "3. Bump the message a time or two over the course of a month or so.
> "4. Try contacting the maintainer directly yourself or through others on the developer's list.
> "5. Declare the library to have no maintainer on the developer's list and volunteer to be the new maintainer.
> "6. Assume maintenance of the library if there are no objections raised on the developer's list within two weeks."
>
> This is certainly a good start and I welcome any input you may have before I post it.  At any rate, step 4 has worked, though Jeff has not yet responded on-list.

Shouldn't we try to move to team maintenance for most if not all libs?
Having only one (or two) people responsible for widely used libraries
doesn't seem ideal.
I think a lot of people would be willing to help out.

-- 
Olaf