On Tue, Aug 19, 2025 at 11:38 AM Peter Dimov via Boost < boost@lists.boost.org> wrote:
Christian Mazakas wrote:
Actually, am I reading this thread correctly in that Chris doesn't accept PRs, he just copy-paste-edits the code into no longer being a copyright infringement and then merges it himself into develop?
It's hard to tell from the outside, but I don't think Chris ever copy-pastes anything.
That's been his policy from day one; he only commits code himself. Before the move to Github this wasn't an issue because there was no way to submit a PR anyway.
You can disable issues on Github, but not PRs, or I'd expect him to have done so.
I understand not wanting to accept contributions because no one can code as well as you can, even for arbitrary reasons. A concurrent I/O runtime is an incredibly complex beast and I wouldn't expect most developers to meet the burden of testing required for ensuring that a change is sound. But that's not what's happening, it seems. It seems like contributors are learning Asio well enough to have meaningful PRs, which Chris then just uses as a reference and then commits himself. This isn't exactly "illegal", but I do believe it flies in the face of the values that Boost should embody. There is no mandate that an author accept a contribution they don't want, but it's different when someone makes a PR and you simply re-author it yourself using them as a reference. --- I wrote the above before checking GH for copyright attribution. After having checked boostorg/asio, there are a few files where Klemens and Rep Invariant Systems were given attribution. There were also single-file contributions from Voipster and Oliver Kowalke. For the above reasons, I think an Asio fork would actually be a really wise decision. An Asio fork could stand and serve as a better embodiment of Boost's values. Therefore: huge +1 to Asio fork idea. - Christian