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 asÂ part of
> their product.Â 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 resumeÌ.
> 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.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk