Subject: Re: [boost] Splitting/rearranging Boost.Utility
From: Alexander Lamaison (awl03_at_[hidden])
Date: 2013-12-11 19:24:46
Daniel James <daniel_at_[hidden]> writes:
> On 11 December 2013 23:41, Alexander Lamaison <awl03_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>> "Peter Dimov" <lists_at_[hidden]> writes:
>>> Alexander Lamaison wrote:
>>>> What part of that means only one person is qualified to make those
>>> Nothing theoretically precludes the number of people qualified to make
>>> those decisions from being 118. In practice, however, the average
>>> hovers somewhere below one.
>>>> The community maintenance idea just means that that responsibility
>>>> is shared between members of a team.
>>> Yeah, I know that too. You're talking theory. I'm talking practice and
>> Countless open-source projects successfully run this way aren't just a
>> theory. Not to mention commercial software developers who maintain code
>> together in teams every day.
> Most successful open source projects are very picky about who has
> commit access.
That's cruical. A free-for-all would just be silly.
> It seems unlikely that this community team would
> consist of people who have sufficiently proven themselves in the boost
> community to maintain core components.
I'm sure there's more than one person who understands the core
components. Having it otherwise would put Boost in a vulnerable
posistion. There's a good reason that companies make sure no important
component is understood by just one developer.
-- Swish - Easy SFTP for Windows Explorer (http://www.swish-sftp.org)
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk