Re: MS STL now open source (and using Boost)

From: Andrey Semashev (andrey.semashev_at_[hidden])
Date: 2019-09-17 18:52:48

On 2019-09-17 20:35, Robert Ramey via Boost wrote:
> 
> Hmmmm - so boost writes something, it gets added to the standard, then 
> the vendor, copies in the boost version and releases it as  part of 
> their product.  I've got a couple of questions about this.
> 
> a) Aside from "certifying" or "legitimizing" a boost library, exactly 
> how is the C++ committee process actually contributing to all this. 
> Looks like just a time consuming way station on a round trip.

The committee creates the standard. Often changing the component along 
the way as a result of review and discussion.

The standard is important as it is the formal specification for all 
language implementors, including those who don't use Boost in their 
implementation. Abandoning the standard means blessing one 
implementation and its maintainers as the "owner" of the language. I 
view that as very detrimental to the language quality and ecosystem.

> b) I think its time to seriously start to consider ideas about who open 
> source authors can get compensated for their efforts are widely used.

If you (not personally you - in general) are looking for material 
compensation for your work then you've probably come to the wrong 
project. Not that rewarding developer's work is bad, but when you 
release source code under BSL or any other open source license, you have 
to understand that that act of release alone does not ensue compensation 
in return. In other words, you're not selling your code in a project 
like Boost, you're gifting it. Though you may receive immaterial 
compensation, like recognition among fellow developers and a nice line 
in your resumé.

> The music business was ignited when improved copyrights enforcement 
> complemented technology (phonograph/radio) in the early 20th century. 
> The result was an explosion of creativity in musical arts: jazz, musical 
> theater, popularization of folk music, film music, etc.

Some might say that the copyright system in the media world is 
ridiculous in the modern times of Internet, YouTube in particular. But I 
don't want to digress in this area.

> c) It's just crazy that the author of a pivotal piece of software which 
> the whole world runs on (or should run on), gets no monetary recognition 
> for these indispensable efforts.

I see nothing crazy about it. The author wrote an amazing piece of code 
and was generous (and probably wise) enough to release it under a 
liberal license, which allowed its wide adoption. You may call that 
altruistic but not crazy.

If we're talking about something like a Nobel Prize for programmers, 
then that might be a good idea, but that is a completely different thing.