Re: Boost Asset Stewardship Review begins 09/03 (Updated)

From: Andrey Semashev (andrey.semashev_at_[hidden])
Date: 2024-09-17 22:40:06

On 9/18/24 01:10, Robert Ramey via Boost wrote:
> On 9/17/24 2:18 PM, Andrey Semashev via Boost wrote:
>> On 9/17/24 23:29, Robert Ramey via Boost wrote:
>>>
>>> Proposed changes to Boost Library Foundation bylaws. refer to:
>>> https://drive.google.com/file/d/1xgtEovxMZThszuaQIMpDpaRdBuH1_BkZ/view
>>>
>>> Section 1. Powers and Duties. [...] The Board shall have the power to
> control and manage policies
>>> for acceptance of new Boost Software and the usage and maintenance
> thereof.
>>
>> I would be strongly opposed to this. The Boost Foundation (or The C++
>> Alliance) never had and never should have the power to affect acceptance
>> of new Boost Software, nor its maintenance. Library acceptance can only
>> happen through the review process.
> Board shall have the power to control and manage policies for acceptance
> of new Boost Software.
> 
> Hmmm - This is not at all the same as having the board decide what
> software to accept.  I wasn't suggesting that the
> Board/Foundation/whatever have such a power.
> 
> The question arises as to what are the procedures for the acceptance of
> Boost Software. Currently, this is addressed by the formal review of
> library submissions.  But what happens if we need to alter this.  For
> example, I'm of the view that Boost Tools should be subject to formal
> review.  The implementation of this policy would have to be in the hands
> of the board of directors - who else could it be?

In the current state of things - the Boost Community. And I believe,
that's how it should be.

If The Boost Foundation has the power to define the policy of library
acceptance then by extension it has the power to affect what is being
accepted.