Re: Stewardship Review Request

From: Ion Gaztañaga (igaztanaga_at_[hidden])
Date: 2024-08-13 10:37:01

El 13/08/2024 a las 12:14, John Maddock via Boost escribió:
>> We also need this decision to have unambiguous authority. If the Boost
>> Foundation, which has a meeting on Thursday, endorses using the review
>> process to resolve the organization question, then I think we’ll have it.
> 
> Since Kristen has already asked for a vote, I believe this particular 
> cat is already out of the bag.
> 
> Best, John.

I'm a bit confused about what is Boost Foundation's position right now.

Latest minutes are from 2024-06-12 Monthly Meeting, so we don't have 
context about how Kristen's post 
(https://lists.boost.org/Archives/boost/2024/07/257301.php) was 
elaborated. But it's an official position since it was signed by "The 
Boost Board of Directors".

I don't know whether David's proposal is an unofficial update on Boost 
Foundation's position and how this relates to Kristen's post.

It would helpful that the information about Boost Foundation's Board's 
minutes about this process could be up to date as soon as reasonably 
possible.

Kristen proposed a binary choice that, with a third option mentioned in 
the ML, maybe made Alliance's proposal 
(https://lists.boost.org/Archives/boost/2024/08/257347.php) closer to 
that third option. I think that shows that we listen to each other and 
try to address some expressed concerns.

I certainly encourage proponents of the fourth choice that David 
mentions in his post to explain the general idea of the proposal in the 
ML, so that we can enrich and improve the debate.

Best,

Ion