Re: Stewardship Review Request

From: Niall Douglas (s_sourceforge_at_[hidden])
Date: 2024-08-13 16:03:33

On 13/08/2024 09:42, Andrey Semashev via Boost wrote:

> 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.

The people who have served, without payment, on the non-development side 
of things have also contributed.

More than a decade ago now I remember arguing with Jon Kalb that the 
perceived lack of connection between the Boost devs and the Boost 
non-devs was going to be a problem long run. There was a lack of 
advertising, lack of communication and lack of understanding. In both 
directions I would say. At the time, I tried my best to persuade Jon to 
have the Boost Steering Committee (as it was known then) to employ staff 
to maintain the infrastructure, but not to do development (apart from 
students). That would create a perspective of value being added by the 
then Steering Committee, rather than being some remote thing nobody 
really knew much about except when it either failed to act, did act, or 
took unpopular decisions.

Things have become a lot worse since, and we have arrived at where we 
are at now where an alternative source of financial funding has been 
supplied. However I wish to make it clear that those who have served and 
do serve on the Boost Steering Committee/Boost Foundation **have** 
contributed using their time, their inconvenience and often their 
resulting unpopularity. And they didn't get paid for it, either.

I think too little appreciation has been shown for the efforts of those 
volunteers over many years.

Niall