On Tue, Aug 6, 2024 at 6:13 AM
Why? The Foundation has never even tried to do this, and the previous such attempt (the infamous CMake announcement) has been a tremendous success.
I can't claim expertise to know whether breaking deadlocks is a function necessary for the Boost project. However, since the Foundation will disavow this responsibility when going with Option 1, it seems prudent to cover bases. Of course, if you feel this is unimportant or even detrimental we could explore what not having it looks like. However, note that for whatever non-profit ends up as the steward, it will be impossible to prevent it from assuming unimportant or detrimental functions, even stacked with Boost authors. Bureaucracies like to do things (for example, WG21 designing their own libraries), and telling them they must not do things tends to fall on deaf ears. Furthermore it is difficult and sometimes impossible to structure a corporation's bylaws in a way to prohibit certain things, because attempting to do so runs afoul of laws regarding corporate governance. Future board members can always undo prior actions. Thanks