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: Bruce Adams (tortoise_74_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-12-16 08:43:12

----- Original Message ----

> From: Mateusz Loskot <mateusz_at_[hidden]>
> To: boost_at_[hidden]
> Sent: Thu, December 16, 2010 1:08:03 PM
> Subject: Re: [boost] [OT] Open Source Forking and Boost (was Re: 
>[SQL-Connectivity] Is Boost interested in CppDB?)
> 
> On 16/12/10 12:04, Dean Michael Berris wrote:
> > On Thu, Dec 16, 2010 at  7:32 PM, Mateusz Loskot<mateusz_at_[hidden]>   
wrote:
> >> On 16/12/10 11:04, Bruce Adams  wrote:
> >>>
> >>> 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.
> >>
> >
> > Either he meant "You" as in  the Community, or "You" as in "Dean
> > Michael Berris" (or in this case, me  :D ).
> 
> Based on the chronology and posts sequence, I still claim
> some  rights to the title of "You" ,-)
>
I knew I should have stayed out of this :)
I meant "you" as in the "community" and I meant "should consider" rather than 
"need".
Its not an order or a criticism just an observation that it seems to work better 
than way
in my experience.
 
> >>> In a way it is a nonsense  to require permission of the maintainer.
> >>
> >>>  [...]
> >>
> >> All you've written sounds somewhat obvious to me,  indeed.
> >>
Good. That means I'm not talking complete garbage. Still you probably wouldn't 
be
amazed at how what is blindingly obvious to one person is clear as mud to 
another.
> >
> > Yeah, but what is the current process  reflecting?
>  > [...]
> 
> That's what I've asked  about.
> 
> Currently, the maintainer's responsibilities [1] are concluded  with
> 
> "If at some point you no longer wish to serve as maintainer of your 
> library, it is your responsibility to make this known to the boost 
> community and to find another individual to take your place."
> 
> [1]  http://www.boost.org/community/reviews.html
> 
> Perhaps they should be  updated with what Bruce has expalined
> and Dave agreed with.
>
I'm an outsider with no say in the matter and no experience with submitting 
patches
to boost.
I would have thought that if someone has been trusted enough to have access to 
SVN
to include their own contributions they can be trusted to access the rest of the 
source tree.
Anyone who abused that priviledge would see it rapidly withdrawn. One point of 
source control
is that you can roll back if things go awry.

 Regards,

Bruce.