Hi all, I'm happy to announce that the Sam library, featuring asio-based synchronization primitives, is being proposed for Boost inclusion. Repo: https://github.com/klemens-morgenstern/sam Docs: https://klemens.dev/sam/ The library is being proposed by Klemens Morgenstern. The review will take place between May the 29th (Monday) and June the 8th (Thursday). I will be managing the review. Boost.Sam offers async asio-based synchronization primitives, similar to standard mutex, condition_variable, semaphore and barrier. It's geared towards library writers that require fine-grain control over their synchronization operations. You can contact both me and the author by mail or on the cpplang Slack. Kind regards, Ruben.
On Fri, May 19, 2023 at 8:30 AM Ruben Perez via Boost <boost@lists.boost.org> wrote:
The library is being proposed by Klemens Morgenstern. The review will take place between May the 29th (Monday) and June the 8th (Thursday). I will be managing the review.
No, this is out of bounds. Klemens and Ruben are staff of C++ Alliance and this is a conflict of interest. The review manager must not be affiliated with C++ Alliance. Klemens knows better I don't understand why this announcement was made. Thanks
On Fri, 19 May 2023, 17:49 Vinnie Falco, <vinnie.falco@gmail.com> wrote:
On Fri, May 19, 2023 at 8:30 AM Ruben Perez via Boost <boost@lists.boost.org> wrote:
The library is being proposed by Klemens Morgenstern. The review will take place between May the 29th (Monday) and June the 8th (Thursday). I will be managing the review.
No, this is out of bounds. Klemens and Ruben are staff of C++ Alliance and this is a conflict of interest. The review manager must not be affiliated with C++ Alliance. Klemens knows better I don't understand why this announcement was made.
It is true that we are both affiliated with the cppalliance. If that's considered a conflict of interests, I apologize for volunteering as review manager and I'm happy to step back. I'd ask the review wizards to reconsider if I'm suited for the task given Vinnie's point. Regards, Ruben.
Thanks
On Fri, 19 May 2023 at 17:49, Vinnie Falco via Boost <boost@lists.boost.org> wrote:
On Fri, May 19, 2023 at 8:30 AM Ruben Perez via Boost <boost@lists.boost.org> wrote:
The library is being proposed by Klemens Morgenstern. The review will take place between May the 29th (Monday) and June the 8th (Thursday). I will be managing the review.
No, this is out of bounds. Klemens and Ruben are staff of C++ Alliance and this is a conflict of interest.
It is! It is my bad that I missed that fact completely.
The review manager must not be affiliated with C++ Alliance.
And, it's been dangling on my TODO for weeks now to add an explicit request to the guidelines that a potential review manager is requested to "disclose to the Boost community if they have any relationship to the author" I have failed to ask Ruben for such disclosure. Thank you Vinnie! I will unschedule Boost.Sam. Best regards, -- Mateusz Loskot, http://mateusz.loskot.net
No, this is out of bounds. Klemens and Ruben are staff of C++ Alliance and this is a conflict of interest.
It is! It is my bad that I missed that fact completely.
I publicly apologize for volunteering. It was out of my lack of knowledge of the Boost community. I will step back and hope for Sam to find a review manager soon. Thanks Vinnie and Mateusz for clarifying stuff. Regards, Ruben.
On Fri, 19 May 2023 at 18:08, Mateusz Loskot wrote:
On Fri, 19 May 2023 at 17:49, Vinnie Falco wrote:
The review manager must not be affiliated with C++ Alliance.
And, it's been dangling on my TODO for weeks now to add an explicit request to the guidelines that a potential review manager is requested to
"disclose to the Boost community if they have any relationship to the author"
Please, see https://github.com/boostorg/website/pull/755 Best regards, -- Mateusz Loskot, http://mateusz.loskot.net
I'm sorry for the mistake as well. For context, Ruben volunteered before joining the cppalliance. I personally didn't consider this a conflict of interest, based on how the cppalliance operates. On Sat, May 20, 2023 at 6:45 AM Mateusz Loskot via Boost < boost@lists.boost.org> wrote:
On Fri, 19 May 2023 at 18:08, Mateusz Loskot wrote:
On Fri, 19 May 2023 at 17:49, Vinnie Falco wrote:
The review manager must not be affiliated with C++ Alliance.
And, it's been dangling on my TODO for weeks now to add an explicit request to the guidelines that a potential review manager is requested to
"disclose to the Boost community if they have any relationship to the author"
Please, see https://github.com/boostorg/website/pull/755
Best regards, -- Mateusz Loskot, http://mateusz.loskot.net
_______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
On Sat, 20 May 2023 at 06:49, Klemens Morgenstern via Boost <boost@lists.boost.org> wrote:
I'm sorry for the mistake as well.
It was mostly mine.
I personally didn't consider this a conflict of interest, based on how the cppalliance operates.
It's often a grayish situation where outcomes depend on subjective point of views. I count on communication and collective clarification. That is also why I proposed a note which asks for disclosure, https://github.com/boostorg/website/pull/755, but there is nothing like a hard rule or procedure for analysing and judging such cases. Best regards, -- Mateusz Loskot, http://mateusz.loskot.net
participants (4)
-
Klemens Morgenstern -
Mateusz Loskot -
Ruben Perez -
Vinnie Falco