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: Dave Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-12-16 08:53:30

On 12/16/10, Dean Michael Berris <mikhailberis_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 16, 2010 at 7:19 PM, Dave Abrahams <dave_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>>
>>
>> BoostPro Computing * http://boostpro.com
>> [Sent from coveted but awkward mobile device]
>
> I'm assuming this is an iPhone. ;)

'Fraid it was, yes.

>> On Dec 16, 2010, at 6:04 AM, Bruce Adams <tortoise_74_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>>
> [snip]
>>
>> +1 to all that. We try to respect peoples' sense of ownership but
>> ultimately the only ones you need to get permission from are the
>> moderators, and that's only if you want the code in Boost proper, because
>> that's what we do here.
>
> Interesting. So if I wanted to get SVN access and start working on
> things in a private branch on the Boost SVN repository (for example,
> to address a specific set of issues against a library Boost.X) and
> then ask for a code review of the patch I'm potentially going to merge
> to trunk at some point later, there's a process to do that?

No, but it doesn't mean we can't do it.  It just hadn't come up, yet,
so we never set up a process.

>> For the record, the big effort to track down Bill Kempf about
>> boost.threads was to get his permission to *change the license* on his
>> code. That's a whole other bag of cats
>
> Ah, alright. Thanks for the clarification on that.
>
> So given that a library is under the BSL, and in the Boost repository,
> what is the process (now) to allow people to work directly on the
> main-line of a library and start fixing issues? Is submitting tickets
> to Trac with patches the only way to go about it?

That's all we've got set up ATM, but that doesn't mean anything about
what's possible.

> How about enabling
> private branches, and having maintainers merge changes from specific
> private branches as soon as a code review on the changes on the
> private branch has been done?

Sounds okay to me; I don't know what the technical/administrative
hurdles might be to doing that through SVNManager, but it could get
done.

> I really am eager to know what the definitive answer to this is so
> that us who really want to contribute to Boost have a clear
> understanding of what it means to: 1) be a maintainer 2) get access to
> the repository for commit access and 3) what the expectation is on
> contributions and contributors alike. I guess this is the point where
> there has to be a consensus on what the community really wants for the
> Boost contribution process to be like.

How about you make a proposal?

> Thanks for taking the time to clear things up. Hopefully something
> comes out of this thread in the form of "community policy" that
> members of the community can agree upon.
>
That would be awesome.

-- 
Dave Abrahams
BoostPro Computing
http://www.boostpro.com