Boost logo

Boost :

From: Andrey Semashev (andrey.semashev_at_[hidden])
Date: 2024-02-15 01:13:51

On 2/15/24 01:46, René Ferdinand Rivera Morell wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 14, 2024 at 3:27 PM Andrey Semashev via Boost
> <boost_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>> I fully agree that the community should decide what will be on the
>> website, content-wise. But given that the website is an important
>> element of the Boost project infrastructure, I would expect Boost
>> Foundation to own and manage it. This will affect what is written in the
>> legal documents such as Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
> Can you be specific as to your meaning of "own" and "manage" in that?
> What specifically is owned? What specifically is managed? Is it
> intellectual ownership? Is it physical ownership?
> Items that could possibly be owned:
> * The source code for the web site.
> * The content for the web site.
> * The user contributed content on the web site.
> * The machines running the web site.
> etc
> Items that could possibly be managed:
> * The repository for the source code.
> * The database for the content.
> * The machines, and controlling accounts, for everything.
> etc

By owning I mean that Boost Foundation should have all rights over the
website implementation. This includes the rights to run, modify and
distribute the code and media content (text, styling, images, video,
audio, etc.) that constitutes the website implementation. This includes
full access to GitHub repositories and other online services that are
used to develop, build and deploy these materials. Boost Foundation must
have full access to the machines and online accounts that are used for
running the website, and preferably own them.

For user-generated content, such as forum and blog posts, videos,
comments, issues on the trackers, discussions, etc., as well as personal
information provided through account registration, that content belongs
to its authors, but Boost Foundation may reserve some rights, such as to
be able to moderate and publish it. But, of course, we first have to
decide what kind of content that will be and how we want to use it. Then
there is the part where a lawyer would help to compose the legal
agreement between Boost Foundation and users.

For library content, such as library code, documentation, library logos,
release notes, library list and so on, that content belongs to the
library authors and maintainers and is licensed to Boost Foundation
under the library license terms (which is usually the Boost Software
License) to allow reproduction and distribution. This type of content
should be explicitly distinct from the user-generated content, as it is
not covered by the users' terms of use agreement.

By managing I mean managing all the above assets and content. For
example, Boost Foundation should be able to expand or reduce the amount
of resources used for running the website (e.g. to accommodate for the
changing load). Boost Foundation should be able to moderate
user-generated content and update the website content, e.g. on Boost
releases or new library additions. Boost Foundation should be able to
perform backups of the website, including user-generated content.

This doesn't necessarily mean that Boost Foundation members will be
doing all of this by themselves. Some things can be automated, other
things can be done by trusted volunteers from the community or hired
staff, if needed. I believe, this is pretty much how it happens today.
But the important part is that the full control over the website should
be in the Boost Foundation hands, not someone else's.

I would like to stress that I'm suggesting this not because I have
reasons to distrust Vinnie or The C++ Alliance. I surely do not intend
to offend anyone. Although I have my complaints, I think they can be
only commended for all the work they are doing on the website. However,
The C++ Alliance is a commercial organization that is distinct from the
Boost project, which is (at least, legally) represented by Boost
Foundation. The website is supposed to be the face of the Boost project,
and an important part of its functioning. I think, the Boost project
should be more self-sufficient and protected against disasters, mishaps
and misbehavior of external parties.

Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at