Boost logo

Boost :

Subject: [boost] [Bug Sprint] Policy on MIA maintainers
From: Jim Bell (Jim_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-11-29 08:32:10

(Was "Re: [boost] [Bug Sprint] The Boost bug sprint has begun!")

On 1:59 PM, Dean Michael Berris wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 29, 2010 at 10:48 AM, Jim Bell <Jim_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>> On 1:59 PM, Marshall Clow wrote:
>>> On Nov 27, 2010, at 7:58 AM, Vicente Botet wrote:
>>>> There are 99 Patches now, this is a good starting point. It would be great
>>>> if the authors/maintainers that want to participate to this Bug Sprint could
>>>> check if the Patches are correct or not, and include them in trunk or change
>>>> to BUG or Feature Request otherwise.
>>> [...]
>> But what do we do for authors/maintainers NOT participating?
> Good question.
> I think for the meantime the best we can do is keep sending in patches
> and bugging the maintainers to either look at the patches. Until we
> get to a consensus on how to deal with inactive maintainers, I guess
> we can only play by the same rules in the meantime.

I think now's the time to get that consensus, or start the process.
(And, of course, I'm thinking about Boost.Guild.)

I'd like someone to walk through a case study right here on the list.
(Or a few people!)

Pick an un(der)-maintained library. (Most open patches/tickets?) Assume
you're not an expert on that library.

Pick one of the submitted patches at random:

Now review it yourself:
* Would you incorporate it?
* What's your level of confidence?
* Should the trunk regression tests get a shot at it?

How much time did you spend reaching your conclusions?

> If someone is willing to step up as a maintainer of a library please
> don't hesitate to express your interest to the maintainer of the
> library you wish to maintain. Getting a maintainer's nod should be
> alright as a go-ahead for the SVN administrators to give commit access
> to whoever volunteers that the original maintainer "anoints".
> Aside from that, really all we can do is look at issues that seem to
> have been neglected, and just keep at it until either:
> 1. The maintainers grant commit access to those who really want to
> contribute and co-maintain the library, or...
> 2. The maintainers actually apply the patches and close the issues.
> Either way we'll get the job done IMO. :)

If a maintainer is MIA, I say "we" apply the patches. One or more people
look at a patch, mark the ticket as recommended, and/or put it on the
list of patches for someone with SVN permissions to apply. Or mark it as
NOT recommended, and close the ticket.

Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at