Subject: Re: [boost] RFC.. Steering Committee Bylaws Proposal
From: Stefan Seefeld (stefan_at_[hidden])
Date: 2017-10-17 03:27:28
On 16.10.2017 07:35, Rene Rivera via Boost wrote:
> It has become clear to me, and some others, that the recent decisions of
> the Steering Committee have exposed various problems with how the Steering
> Committee operates. At CppCon I met with some of the Steering Committee and
> expressed the concerns with them. I also explained, from my experience in
> other organizations, how such issues are managed. The result of that is
> that I will be proposing the Steering Committee adopt operating Bylaws. But
> before formally presenting them to the Steering Committee I'd like get
> feedback on them <http://bit.ly/2hI22DN>.
> The Bylaws hopefully address some key issues that I feel are at the core of
> the current problems:
> * Decisions can be made without input from interested parties.
> * Opaque selection of members.
> * No recourse by library authors to correct problems.
One particularly contentious issue I see is related to the committee's
mandate: what decisions are in scope for the committee, and how are
conflicts resolved, should they arise ?
I believe this question is even bigger than just about the Steering
Committee and its mandate; it is about the very nature of the Boost
organization, in relation to its member projects, and in particular, how
projects as well as the entire organization are governed, how decisions
are being made, etc.
(To take a recent conflict: is it really the committee's mandate to
impose what tools individual projects have to use ?)
I don't see any of these (or related) questions being addressed anywhere.
-- ...ich hab' noch einen Koffer in Berlin...
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk