El 09/10/2026 a las 12:55, Tobias Stensbeck via Boost escribió:
Hello Boost developers,
I recently opened a PR on iostreams (#194) and noticed afterwards that the project is quite inactive (only 2 commits in the last year and issues/PRs sit unanswered for years). I would like to understand whether anyone is currently maintaining iostreams and reviewing contributions.
This led me to search the mailing list a bit:
The original author, Jonathan Turkanis, is still listed as the current maintainer, but even as far back as 2010 there was a message from Edward Diener saying that iostreams looks abandoned [1].
In 2018 Diener wrote [2]:
"I have sort of taken over maintenance, since the original developer stopped paying attention to the library a long time ago. However I do not mind if it gets added to CMT and others can help maintaining the library."
He was active in the repository from 2016-2021.
From 2021 until now the most active contributor has been Peter Dimov (mostly CI/build maintenance).
So my questions are:
1. Is there currently an active maintainer for iostreams? 2. Is the Community Maintenance Team still active, and if so, who are its members and could iostreams be put under its care? 3. If no maintainer is currently available, what is the process for arranging ongoing maintenance?
Best regards,
Tobias Stensbeck Graphics Engineer, Threedy GmbH
Hi Tobias, From what I can see, Boost.Iostreams is only being updated for basic CI issues by Peter Dimov and Andrey Semashev. So, yes, it needs a maintainer. I'm not sure the CMT initiative is really active anymore. PR#194 looks to me to have very high quality and very little risk (it's a new feature that doesn't touch on the previous codebase). The problem is that, without a maintainer, people with write access to the repo (Dimov, Semashev) are generally reluctant to merge functionality-related PRs they can't subsequently respond about. To cut to the chase, would you be willing to become the maintainer of Boost.Iostreams? It's obvious you've got the required expertise (PR#194 is, again, very good), so the question is more about whether you can put on the time to go through outstanding issues and keep an eye on upcoming ones. Best, Joaquín M López Muñoz