Re: [boost] 5 Observations - My experience with the boost libraries

Subject: Re: [boost] 5 Observations - My experience with the boost libraries
From: Daniel James (dnljms_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-03-24 16:17:23

On 24 March 2010 19:37, Edward Diener <eldiener_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> If none of the Boost
> leaders pay any attention to this situation then the feeling by end-users
> that a library is not really being supported will continue and people will
> stop using that library.

Boost leaders?

> If Boost had some sort of policy by which
> authors/maintainers of a library, who are no longer paying any attention to
> it in response to Boost users, get relieved of the responsibility of
> supporting the library and someone else is chosen to maintain it instead, it
> would be good for the end-users and for Boost developers as well.

IMO it'd be better if a group of people took over, for a higher bus
factor. I would put the library into maintenance i.e. no major
changes. Any new features could be developed separately and then
proposed on the list (not necessarily a formal review). I'm not sure
if it should be formalised though, circumstances might different for
different components.

> Of course
> this would mean that whatever "rights" once a library is submitted to Boost
> ( I am not a legal expert ) which the author of a Boost library retains can
> be removed if the author does not support the library any longer, and that
> this is part of Boost policy.

The boost license is pretty clear. There's no need to remove any
rights, ownership isn't as formal as you think. It's mostly based on
respect and convention.

http://www.boost.org/LICENSE_1_0.txt

Daniel