Re: [boost] A Follow Up to My Original Note Re The Future of Boost

Vinnie Falco writes:

On Thu, Aug 1, 2024 at 7:08 AM Boris Kolpackov via Boost wrote:

...

3. Nominate someone thoughtful and respected by both camps (like Peter Dimov) as a final arbiter in the disputes between the Alliance and the Foundation when it comes to the Boost business.

Well, it is a bit late for that :) The dispute is resolved with Kristen's latest announcement, which leaves this important decision to the community as it should be.

Let me quote what I believe is the relevant part of Kristen's email: Kristen Shaker via Boost writes:

Accordingly, we feel the most appropriate thing to do at this juncture would be to let the developers make a decision on how they would like to proceed regarding what level of ownership the C++ Alliance should have on Boost Library assets.

Here are what we believe to be the available options.

1. The C++ Alliance assumes control of the Boost assets, including the boost.org domain name. The Boost Foundation becomes uninvolved in any decisions related to the Boost Libraries.

2. The Boost Foundation continues to be the stewards of the boost.org domain name and related assets. New assets that are meant to be associated with the Boost Libraries are transferred to the Boost Foundation. In any matters related to the Boost Libraries, the Board will abide by any decisions made by the developers but will no longer vote themselves on issues as they relate to the Boost Libraries unless there truly is no clear consensus or path forward.

Maybe I am reading it wrong, but this essentially says two things: 1. Boost developers should decide how to resolve the impasse. 2. It proposes two possible ways to resolve it. Why is it late for the Boost developers to consider and potentially decide on other options?