Re: The Future of Boost Governance

From: Joaquin M López Muñoz (joaquinlopezmunoz_at_[hidden])
Date: 2024-09-12 17:43:56

El 12/09/2024 a las 19:04, Dave Abrahams via Boost escribió:
> I'm writing to represent the spirit in which Boost was founded and in which we ran it, as a community, up until 2013.

Hi Dave, good to see you around!

> I realize the review is nominally about asset stewardship, but IIUC the more fundamental change being discussed is about governance, not who holds Boost's property.
No, the review is exactly about asset stewardship, as made explicit by 
Glen in
the review announcement:

https://lists.boost.org/boost-announce/2024/09/0629.php

"To be clear, the review is not about deciding governance over Boost
C++ library development. That remains in the hands of the Boost
developer community."

If you ask me, I think governance, cultural and related issues are very much
worth discussing, but such discussions do not belong in the review really.

> It is my understanding that despite an agreement to coordinate the launch of a new Boost website with the Foundation board, the Alliance decided to launch boost.io <http://boost.io/> in parallel with boost.org <http://boost.org/>.

boost.io was announced on June 17 here:

https://lists.boost.org/Archives/boost/2024/06/256965.php

and in a manner that explained that this was a launch-ready preview
in preparation to the switch to boost.org, which at the time was
agreed on between the C++ Alliance and the Boost Foundation.
The homepage on boost.io says:

"Proposed for boost.org"

When I wrote that post, I was confident that the switch was a matter of
days or a few weeks, but on June 26 the Boost Foundation announced
their termination of collaboration with the C++ Alliance:

https://lists.boost.org/Archives/boost//2024/06/256978.php

I personally take the blame for making the announcement without
checking that the agreement was secure moving forward.

Joaquin M Lopez Munoz