Re: Stewardship Review Request

From: Kristen Shaker (kristen_at_[hidden])
Date: 2024-08-13 15:20:11

> Would Kristen or Sankel like to prepare their side of things from the
> Boost Foundation?

With David's help, I'd be happy to put this together.

Kristen proposed a binary choice

I proposed the options that I could think of. As a fallible human being, I
fully acknowledge and expect there might be alternative proposals that were
beyond my comprehension at the time. I would encourage anyone with a
competing proposal to submit it for review. The idea of this is to come out
of the proceedings with an unambiguous signal about the direction of the
Boost Libraries leadership. IMO, that requires full consideration of all
options.

Warm Regards,
Kristen

On Tue, Aug 13, 2024 at 11:14 AM René Ferdinand Rivera Morell via Boost <
boost_at_[hidden]> wrote:

> On Tue, Aug 13, 2024 at 3:43 AM Andrey Semashev via Boost
> <boost_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> >
> > On 8/13/24 11:10, Ion Gaztañaga via Boost wrote:
> > > El 13/08/2024 a las 2:15, David Sankel via Boost escribió:
> > >>     6.
> > >>
> > >>     The greater C++ community should be aware and invited to
> > >> participate in
> > >>     the discussion. Social media and C++ podcasts should be utilized.
> > >
> > > This could create a polarized, divisive environment that would not help
> > > be helpful. IMHO this should be discussed inside the Boost community,
> > > between people that actually participate in the Boost libraries
> project.
> >
> > I agree, the decision should be primarily after the Boost community,
> > i.e. the people who will actually be affected by the decision. IMO, the
> > wider C++ community should be made aware of the proceedings to avoid
> > confusion regarding the Boost project, but comments from outside the
> > project should be taken with a fair grain of salt, if at all. But, of
> > course, weighting of opinions is the review manager's prerogative.
> >
> > Re. who constitutes the Boost community, it should obviously include
> > library authors and maintainers, as well as people who regularly
> > contribute to library and infrastructure maintenance. People affiliated
> > with either party whose proposal is being reviewed should clearly state
> > their affiliation in their reviews.
>
> Indeed. An arrangement where the individuals that do not actively
> volunteer involved in the process that governs the active volunteers
> reduces the self agency of the volunteers. And eventually leads to
> demoralized volunteers which drives those volunteers away. It would
> escalate the current, and historical, issue of lack of volunteer self
> determination outside of just the library realm.
>
> --
> -- René Ferdinand Rivera Morell
> -- Don't Assume Anything  -- No Supone Nada
> -- Robot Dreams - http://robot-dreams.net
>
> _______________________________________________
> Unsubscribe & other changes:
> http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
>