On 16/12/10 12:04, Dean Michael Berris wrote:
On Thu, Dec 16, 2010 at 7:32 PM, Mateusz Loskot<mateusz@loskot.net> wrote:
On 16/12/10 11:04, Bruce Adams wrote:
I really shouldn't get involved in this but... You need to move away from the idea of code ownership, especially in the context of a community project.
In spite of the fact you followed up my post, I assume you don't address the "You need to" directly to me but to the Community in general.
Either he meant "You" as in the Community, or "You" as in "Dean Michael Berris" (or in this case, me :D ).
Based on the chronology and posts sequence, I still claim some rights to the title of "You" ,-)
In a way it is a nonsense to require permission of the maintainer.
[...]
All you've written sounds somewhat obvious to me, indeed.
Yeah, but what is the current process reflecting? [...]
That's what I've asked about. Currently, the maintainer's responsibilities [1] are concluded with "If at some point you no longer wish to serve as maintainer of your library, it is your responsibility to make this known to the boost community and to find another individual to take your place." [1] http://www.boost.org/community/reviews.html Perhaps they should be updated with what Bruce has expalined and Dave agreed with. Best regards, -- Mateusz Loskot, http://mateusz.loskot.net Charter Member of OSGeo, http://osgeo.org Member of ACCU, http://accu.org