Re: [boost] [OT] Open Source Forking and Boost (was Re: [SQL-Connectivity] Is Boost interested in CppDB?)

Subject: Re: [boost] [OT] Open Source Forking and Boost (was Re: [SQL-Connectivity] Is Boost interested in CppDB?)
From: Mateusz Loskot (mateusz_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-12-16 06:32:44

On 16/12/10 11:04, Bruce Adams wrote:
> ----- Original Message ----
>
>> From: Mateusz Loskot<mateusz_at_[hidden]>
>> To: boost_at_[hidden]
>> Sent: Thu, December 16, 2010 10:17:34 AM
>> Subject: Re: [boost] [OT] Open Source Forking and Boost (was Re:
>> [SQL-Connectivity] Is Boost interested in CppDB?)
>>
>> On 16/12/10 03:26, Dean Michael Berris wrote:
>>> On Thu, Dec 16, 2010 at  11:17 AM, Marshall Clow<mclow.lists_at_[hidden]>
>> wrote:
>>>> On Dec 15, 2010, at 6:48 PM, Dean Michael Berris  wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> I agree with you, but getting the current  maintainers -- who are
>>>>> technically, not maintaining the  libraries -- to yield maintenance at
>>>>> least to the whole  community (or to a larger set of contributors)
>>>>> hasn't been  "proven" yet at least for Boost. I know Boost.Thread had
>>>>> been  taken over successfully before, that precedent required having  to
>>>>> track down the (sole) original maintainer, getting him to  agree and
>>>>> yield to a specific person, sounds like a lot of work  compared to just
>>>>> people clicking a button to "fork".  :D
>>>>
>>>> I didn't have any trouble "taking over"  Boost.Array.
>>>> I asked around, no one had any problems with it, and it  was done.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Sure, but you did have to get the OK from  the original maintainer right?
>>
>> Is it a requirement to receive a Go from  an original author?
>> I thought there is a mechanism in Boost that grants the  Community
>> permission to make decisions if an author/maintainer disappears  without
>> any contact.
>
>
> I really shouldn't get involved in this but...
> You need to move away from the idea of code ownership, especially
> in the context of a community project.

In spite of the fact you followed up my post, I assume you don't address
the "You need to" directly to me but to the Community in general.

> In a way it is a nonsense to require permission of the maintainer.
 > [...]

All you've written sounds somewhat obvious to me, indeed.

Best regards,
-- 
Mateusz Loskot, http://mateusz.loskot.net
Charter Member of OSGeo, http://osgeo.org
Member of ACCU, http://accu.org