Subject: Re: [boost] RFC.. Steering Committee Bylaws Proposal
From: Niall Douglas (s_sourceforge_at_[hidden])
Date: 2017-10-18 22:29:05
> I think you're more alarmed than you should be.
> Legal and Accounting are hard, especially in a global context, and the SFC is and has been a great resource for open-source projects. (I am sharing my personal opinion based on SFC and buildbot project; I have no knowledge of boost's arrangement).
I wouldn't be as positive personally. For the 10% we pay them, I have
not been convinced of the value add. But then I suppose our 10% is a lot
more money than most other open source org's 10%. For them, then value
add probably is worth it.
> But I 100% agree that transparency should be improved.
The SC is much more transparent than has been given credit for. You just
need to be paying attention.
> The fact that the boost.org site doesn't really talk about SFC should be corrected, and I hope the current operating rules of that board could be posted. Just the simple question of "is the Steering Committee the same as the operating board for SFC purposes?" should be obvious. Maybe these things are on the website, but I couldn't find them.
The reason that doesn't exist is because nobody has submitted a pull
request to boostorg/website adding it. Volunteers to write it are
welcome I am sure.
-- ned Productions Limited Consulting http://www.nedproductions.biz/ http://ie.linkedin.com/in/nialldouglas/
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk