Re: A Follow Up to My Original Note Re The Future of Boost

From: René Ferdinand Rivera Morell (grafikrobot_at_[hidden])
Date: 2024-08-01 18:07:34

On Thu, Aug 1, 2024 at 12:59 PM John Maddock via Boost
<boost_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>
> On 01/08/2024 13:12, Andrey Semashev via Boost wrote:
> > On 7/31/24 23:11, Kristen Shaker via Boost wrote:
> >> Here are what we believe to be the available options.
> >>
> >>     1.
> >>
> >>     The C++ Alliance assumes control of the Boost assets, including the
> >>     boost.org domain name. The Boost Foundation becomes uninvolved in any
> >>     decisions related to the Boost Libraries.
> >>     2.
> >>
> >>     The Boost Foundation continues to be the stewards of the boost.org
> >>     domain name and related assets. New assets that are meant to be associated
> >>     with the Boost Libraries are transferred to the Boost Foundation. In any
> >>     matters related to the Boost Libraries, the Board will abide by any
> >>     decisions made by the developers but will no longer vote themselves on
> >>     issues as they relate to the Boost Libraries unless there truly is no clear
> >>     consensus or path forward.
> > I'm probably not going to be helpful, but I don't really like either of
> > the options, with the first one being slightly less preferable.
>
> Exactly, it's sort of like asking a panel of folks who don't know each
> other (the developers) to conduct a job interview with two applicants
> they also don't know.  Expect an entirely random answer!

Interesting analogy and perspective. That suggests that a review
process, as suggested elsewhere, for the developers to make a choice
is the way to go. Where it would allow the applicants to promote their
vita.

-- 
-- René Ferdinand Rivera Morell
-- Don't Assume Anything  -- No Supone Nada
-- Robot Dreams - http://robot-dreams.net