On Tue, Sep 10, 2024 at 6:03 PM Matt Borland
It's sad there's so much negative energy in the Boost project towards the people volunteering their free time to support it in the Boost Foundation, even recognizing much of it is based on misunderstandings. No one should be surprised why most of the board has steered clear from these discussions.
But, if I am reading this correctly, then this means that the Boost Foundation is actively avoiding engagement with the Boost community.
I don't think this accurately characterizes what I said. I'm talking about individuals undergoing an incredibly stressful time with competing emotions such as guilt for not doing more to prevent what Boost is becoming (or has become) and dread of walking into a shitstorm. If the board of a foundation can't engage with the community they literally
share a name with, perhaps it's time to move on?
The Boost Foundation was the one that asked the community to decide on governance. If the decision goes in the direction it looks to be going, I'd be highly surprised if the foundation will want anything to do with the new Boost. I can't fault the foundation for divesting Boost assets, and reorganizing
into say the Beman Project Foundation as that is now clearly the focus area, and place where you see the ability to affect change.
Beman is just one of several interesting Boost Foundation projects. I happen to be a member of the Beman project and the Boost Foundation. Others in the Foundation are mostly involved in other projects, like the C++Now conference.
I would not waste my time volunteering on something I felt was against me either.
I'm personally motivated out of concern that the Boost brand will be tarnished by new Boost. This is something that will impact many of my friends who have contributed so much to Boost's success and have an identity with it. However, I think this decision will make a clear separation point between old Boost and whatever becomes of new Boost.