Re: [boost] Responsibility for orphaned libraries

From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-03-25 21:06:51

"Keith MacDonald" <boost_at_[hidden]> writes:

> Sorry, I should have made it clearer that I was only using the lack of 
> response to iostreams questions as an example of what could happen.  The 
> real question I was trying to ask was is there a risk of using Boost in an 
> application, perhaps written under contract for a company, and then finding 
> that you have to maintain the library, as well as your application, because 
> the library developer has moved on?  

There is always a risk.  On the other hand, you run the same risk with
libraries from any vendor... except that you may not have the right to
make changes to the source of those libraries.

That said, enough people have an interest in the viability of Boost
that we hope to be able to transfer maintenance responsibility to
someone else when a developer moves on.

> To paraphrase my original question, what would Boost do with the
> library under such circumstances?

Most likely we'd continue to ship it and fix any regressions at
least.  And if it was brought to our attention that the library was
languishing, we'd look for a new maintainer.

-- 
Dave Abrahams
Boost Consulting
www.boost-consulting.com