Subject: Re: [boost] RFC.. Steering Committee Bylaws Proposal
From: Paul A. Bristow (pbristow_at_[hidden])
Date: 2017-10-18 08:33:09
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Boost [mailto:boost-bounces_at_[hidden]] On Behalf Of Rene Rivera via Boost
> Sent: 16 October 2017 12:35
> To: boost_at_[hidden]
> Cc: Rene Rivera
> Subject: [boost] RFC.. Steering Committee Bylaws Proposal
> 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.
> This follows the original goals of the formation of the formation of
> Steering Committee of being transparent and responsive <
I can understand that you are still spitting feathers about the crass handling of B2/Cmake, but this seems a big legalistic sledge
hammer to try to solve that issue, and others too.
It is quite reasonable for the Steering Committee to opine that the number of users of Boost might be boosted by providing a way to
use another build tool, but ultimately, the library writers will control what happens by voting with their feet, or fingers.
Let's keep muddling on ;-)
and Carry On Coding :-)
--- Paul A. Bristow Prizet Farmhouse Kendal UK LA8 8AB +44 (0) 1539 561830
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk