Re: [Asset Stewardship] A request for clarification

From: Glen Fernandes (glen.fernandes_at_[hidden])
Date: 2024-09-10 13:20:40

On Tue, Sep 10, 2024 at 2:38 AM Andrzej Krzemienski  wrote:
> Thanks Vinnie. This is a very informative reply. Let me summarize to see if
> I understood.
>
> Should the outcome of this review be to accept the Fiscal Sponsorship
> Proposal by C++ Alliance:
> * the contents of the agreement between the Current Committee and the C++
> Alliance are yet to be constructed. Appendix 1 of the proposal is only
> there to give an idea of how the actual agreement might look like
> * the Current Committee will self-appoint itself, but the "accept" outcome
> of this review will be a confirmation that the Boost Developer Community
> actually approves this
> * the Boost Foundation will be able to pass the ownership of the Boost
> assets to the C++ Alliance, and the "accept" outcome of this review will be
> a confirmation that the Boost Developer Community actually approves this
>
> Is this a fair summary?
> Glen, as the review manager, is this also your understanding?

Hi Andrzej,

I interpreted the fiscal sponsorship agreement as being well defined,
i.e. being without holes or omissions that would make it otherwise
unfit  for adoption.

For the founding members of the new Committee: The proposal suggests
three members of the Boost community and the review acceptance would
also involve acceptance of this committee's composition. I believe the
intention here is for the review manager to decide differently, which
could be motivated by any review feedback received about the proposed
committee structure and initial members.

Otherwise, everything else is in agreement with my understanding too.

Glen