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

From: Joaquin M López Muñoz (joaquinlopezmunoz_at_[hidden])
Date: 2024-08-02 07:58:51

El 02/08/2024 a las 0:53, Ion Gaztañaga via Boost escribió:
> El 01/08/2024 a las 20:07, Joaquin M López Muñoz via Boost escribió:
>> El 31/07/2024 a las 22:11, Kristen Shaker via Boost escribió:
>>> There was some discussion about the assets being held in a third 
>>> party non
>>> profit controlled by a subset of the Boost Developers. However, 
>>> given that
>>> there are already many Boost Developers on the Boost Foundation 
>>> Board of
>>> Directors, we don’t see this as a meaningful deviation from the 
>>> status quo.
>>
>> I think that your argument that a potential third party controlled by 
>> a subset of the
>> Boost Developers is not meaningfully different to the Boost 
>> Foundation is incorrect:
>>
>> [...]
>
> Hi Joaquín,
>
> Just to try to clarify a bit the "third option" that John and you are 
> mentioning (and think some other have also suggested), as I understand 
> it:
>
> - A new non-profit entity
>
> - Controlled by a subset of active and prominent Boost Developers 
> (e.g. those should be the overwhelming majority of the board)
>
> - An entity whose primary (unique?) purpose is to support the Boost 
> libraries (no additional projects, no conferences, etc.).
>
> Is this an accurate description of the "third option"? If so, I agree 
> that this is a substantial deviation from the status quo. If other 
> boost developers find this meaningfully different, then this option 
> should definitely be available.

Hi Ion,

Yes, this is a good description of how this third option could look 
like, and yes,
the Boost Foundation does not currently look like that.

Joaquin M Lopez Munoz