Asset Stewardship Review

Christian Mazakas

6 Sep 2024 6 Sep '24

3:04 p.m.

Disclaimer: Alliance employee Hi, I'm a little confused at what the Boost Foundation put forth. The opening review email states:

...

To be clear, the review is not about deciding governance over Boost C++ library development. That remains in the hands of the Boost developer community.

But TBF's proposal seems entirely to be governance-related. In terms of asset stewardship, it's kind of a no-brainer to choose the organization that _didn't_ almost lose the boost.org domain name. Plus, the Alliance has Sam Darwin and he's infallible. But to the Boost Foundation's credit, I found myself agreeing with a lot of the points being mentioned. Boost _should_ consider introducing a formal CoC. Boost _should_ officially migrate to CMake and being direct here: this does mean completely abandoning b2. We need to revitalize Boost with the youth culture and to the youth, these things matter quite a bit. - Christian

Show replies by date

Дмитрий Архипов

6 Sep 6 Sep

3:12 p.m.

пт, 6 сент. 2024 г., 18:04 Christian Mazakas via Boost < boost@lists.boost.org>:

...

We need to revitalize Boost with the youth culture and to the youth, these things matter quite a bit.

That be straight bussin fam

...

Peter Dimov

3:41 p.m.

Дмитрий Архипов wrote:

...

пт, 6 сент. 2024 г., 18:04 Christian Mazakas via Boost < boost@lists.boost.org>:

...
We need to revitalize Boost with the youth culture and to the youth, these things matter quite a bit.

That be straight bussin fam

No cap

Vinnie Falco

4:19 p.m.

On Fri, Sep 6, 2024 at 8:42 AM Peter Dimov via Boost wrote:

...

No cap

As mailing list readers may be unfamiliar with some of this newer terminology, allow me to explain. Gold dental crowns are an attractive option for many patients, as the properties of the metal make it ideal for dental restorations. The metal is unreactive, naturally hypoallergenic, and the alloy used is a bit softer than the traditional quartz or porcelain materials used. This reduces the wear on opposing teeth. The potential drawback is the non-normative coloration. For this reason, gold restorations (including inlays and onlays) are typically reserved for the posterior teeth where they are less visible. However in some cultures, visible gold restorations are used to signal status. For example in urban culture, an anterior series of adjacent gold crowns is referred to as a "grill" (plural: grillz) and signifies wealth. In some cases these crowns are inlaid with precious stones such as diamonds, as can be seen here: https://irp-cdn.multiscreensite.com/54388a06a7bd4a47bd12677529f7d0c9/dms3rep... Due to the high cost of authentic gold crowns, the practice of wearing gold veneers arose. This is a form of non-dental gold jewelry which can be applied and removed by the wearer. For example, if a fashion-forward Boost contributor wanted to identify with this trend, they could purchase this inexpensive, single-tooth tooth cover: https://www.amazon.com/Factory-Plated-Removable-Single-Polishing/dp/B07C352X... While this is a less expensive choice, wearers of gold tooth covers may experience pushback when attempting to integrate in urban culture social settings. They may be accused of "fronting" [1], with the implication that they are attempting to portray status or wealth which they do not have. As these removable gold tooth covers are effectively a cap over the tooth, they became informally known as "caps." Thus, the term "no cap" metaphorically indicates that the gold grillz are in fact real and not the cheaper removable form of tooth covers. Thanks [1] https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=fronting

Andrey Semashev

4:43 p.m.

On 9/6/24 19:19, Vinnie Falco via Boost wrote:

...

On Fri, Sep 6, 2024 at 8:42 AM Peter Dimov via Boost wrote:

...
No cap

As mailing list readers may be unfamiliar with some of this newer terminology, allow me to explain.

Gold dental crowns are an attractive option for many patients, as the properties of the metal make it ideal for dental restorations. The metal is unreactive, naturally hypoallergenic, and the alloy used is a bit softer than the traditional quartz or porcelain materials used. This reduces the wear on opposing teeth. The potential drawback is the non-normative coloration. For this reason, gold restorations (including inlays and onlays) are typically reserved for the posterior teeth where they are less visible. However in some cultures, visible gold restorations are used to signal status. For example in urban culture, an anterior series of adjacent gold crowns is referred to as a "grill" (plural: grillz) and signifies wealth. In some cases these crowns are inlaid with precious stones such as diamonds, as can be seen here:

https://irp-cdn.multiscreensite.com/54388a06a7bd4a47bd12677529f7d0c9/dms3rep...

Due to the high cost of authentic gold crowns, the practice of wearing gold veneers arose. This is a form of non-dental gold jewelry which can be applied and removed by the wearer. For example, if a fashion-forward Boost contributor wanted to identify with this trend, they could purchase this inexpensive, single-tooth tooth cover:

https://www.amazon.com/Factory-Plated-Removable-Single-Polishing/dp/B07C352X...

While this is a less expensive choice, wearers of gold tooth covers may experience pushback when attempting to integrate in urban culture social settings. They may be accused of "fronting" [1], with the implication that they are attempting to portray status or wealth which they do not have. As these removable gold tooth covers are effectively a cap over the tooth, they became informally known as "caps."

Thus, the term "no cap" metaphorically indicates that the gold grillz are in fact real and not the cheaper removable form of tooth covers.

Thanks

[1] https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=fronting

Even with this long explanation, the meaning of Peter's comment is lost on me.

Joaquin M López Muñoz

4:45 p.m.

El 06/09/2024 a las 18:43, Andrey Semashev via Boost escribió:

...

On 9/6/24 19:19, Vinnie Falco via Boost wrote: [...] Even with this long explanation, the meaning of Peter's comment is lost on me.

It means "indeed". I had to investigate myself, too. Joaquin M Lopez Munoz

Peter Dimov

4:51 p.m.

Joaquin M López Muñoz wrote:

...

El 06/09/2024 a las 18:43, Andrey Semashev via Boost escribió:

...
On 9/6/24 19:19, Vinnie Falco via Boost wrote: [...] Even with this long explanation, the meaning of Peter's comment is lost on me.

It means "indeed". I had to investigate myself, too.

It means "this is true, not an embellishment or an exaggeration".

Joaquin M López Muñoz

4:54 p.m.

El 06/09/2024 a las 18:51, Peter Dimov via Boost escribió:

...

Joaquin M López Muñoz wrote:

...
El 06/09/2024 a las 18:43, Andrey Semashev via Boost escribió:

...
On 9/6/24 19:19, Vinnie Falco via Boost wrote: [...] Even with this long explanation, the meaning of Peter's comment is lost on me. It means "indeed". I had to investigate myself, too. It means "this is true, not an embellishment or an exaggeration".

Thanks for the clarification! Joaquin M Lopez Munoz

Peter Dimov

5:04 p.m.

Joaquin M López Muñoz wrote:

...

El 06/09/2024 a las 18:51, Peter Dimov via Boost escribió:

...
Joaquin M López Muñoz wrote:

...
El 06/09/2024 a las 18:43, Andrey Semashev via Boost escribió:

...
On 9/6/24 19:19, Vinnie Falco via Boost wrote: [...] Even with this long explanation, the meaning of Peter's comment is lost on me. It means "indeed". I had to investigate myself, too. It means "this is true, not an embellishment or an exaggeration".

Thanks for the clarification!

You are perfectly welcome. I find it amusing that my short "no cap" has generated so much discussion, whereas Dmitry's substantially more elaborate and impressive linguistic attempt of making the Boost mailing list more attractive to the youth has been ignored.

Joaquin M López Muñoz

5:07 p.m.

El 06/09/2024 a las 19:04, Peter Dimov via Boost escribió:

...

[...]

I find it amusing that my short "no cap" has generated so much discussion, whereas Dmitry's substantially more elaborate and impressive linguistic attempt of making the Boost mailing list more attractive to the youth has been ignored.

Everybody knows what "bussin" and "fam" mean. Joaquin M Lopez Munoz

Andrey Semashev

5:10 p.m.

On 9/6/24 20:07, Joaquin M López Muñoz via Boost wrote:

...

El 06/09/2024 a las 19:04, Peter Dimov via Boost escribió:

...
[...]

I find it amusing that my short "no cap" has generated so much discussion, whereas Dmitry's substantially more elaborate and impressive linguistic attempt of making the Boost mailing list more attractive to the youth has been ignored.

Everybody knows what "bussin" and "fam" mean.

I don't.

John Maddock

5:11 p.m.

On 06/09/2024 18:07, Joaquin M López Muñoz via Boost wrote:

...

El 06/09/2024 a las 19:04, Peter Dimov via Boost escribió:

...
[...]

I find it amusing that my short "no cap" has generated so much discussion, whereas Dmitry's substantially more elaborate and impressive linguistic attempt of making the Boost mailing list more attractive to the youth has been ignored.

Everybody knows what "bussin" and "fam" mean.

Except us old folks!

Дмитрий Архипов

5:22 p.m.

пт, 6 сент. 2024 г., 20:11 John Maddock via Boost :

...

On 06/09/2024 18:07, Joaquin M López Muñoz via Boost wrote:

...
Everybody knows what "bussin" and "fam" mean.

Except us old folks!

My post can be translated as "that's a very good point, my friend". But of course, I was being ironic. As was Peter's response to my post.

...

Andrey Semashev

4:41 p.m.

On 9/6/24 18:04, Christian Mazakas via Boost wrote:

...

Disclaimer: Alliance employee

Hi, I'm a little confused at what the Boost Foundation put forth.

The opening review email states:

...
To be clear, the review is not about deciding governance over Boost C++ library development. That remains in the hands of the Boost developer community.

But TBF's proposal seems entirely to be governance-related.

In terms of asset stewardship, it's kind of a no-brainer to choose the organization that _didn't_ almost lose the boost.org domain name. Plus, the Alliance has Sam Darwin and he's infallible.

But to the Boost Foundation's credit, I found myself agreeing with a lot of the points being mentioned. Boost _should_ consider introducing a formal CoC. Boost _should_ officially migrate to CMake and being direct here: this does mean completely abandoning b2.

We need to revitalize Boost with the youth culture and to the youth, these things matter quite a bit.

If CoC and inclusivity is what matters most to those who you refer to as "youth" then I would prefer those people to be *not* part of Boost. Let them convene in their SJW parties somewhere else, please.

Christian Mazakas

5:11 p.m.

On Fri, Sep 6, 2024 at 9:42 AM Andrey Semashev via Boost < boost@lists.boost.org> wrote:

...

If CoC and inclusivity is what matters most to those who you refer to as "youth" then I would prefer those people to be *not* part of Boost. Let them convene in their SJW parties somewhere else, please.

You say that but no offense, this isn't about what you think. This is about what other people think. And a good amount of the young developers I chat with on various discords say that an open-source project having a CoC is a determining factor if they're going to invest into making a contribution. You have to understand that contributors invest their own time into a project and to Sankel's point, we should want volunteer contributions in addition to paid ones. Some day, the old guard will come to pass and who will be left standing? If the youth say that a CoC is important then it's important. All we have to do is take our existing tacit Boost etiquette and put it into a written document called code-of-conduct.txt. - Christian

Peter Dimov

5:22 p.m.

Christian Mazakas wrote:

...

If the youth say that a CoC is important then it's important.

Do they, though?

Andrey Semashev

5:35 p.m.

On 9/6/24 20:11, Christian Mazakas via Boost wrote:

...

On Fri, Sep 6, 2024 at 9:42 AM Andrey Semashev via Boost < boost@lists.boost.org> wrote:

...
If CoC and inclusivity is what matters most to those who you refer to as "youth" then I would prefer those people to be *not* part of Boost. Let them convene in their SJW parties somewhere else, please.

You say that but no offense, this isn't about what you think. This is about what other people think.

And a good amount of the young developers I chat with on various discords say that an open-source project having a CoC is a determining factor if they're going to invest into making a contribution.

And I respect their decision not to contribute on the basis of a missing CoC. Should they decide not to contribute, that is fine and a good thing, IMO.

...

You have to understand that contributors invest their own time into a project and to Sankel's point, we should want volunteer contributions in addition to paid ones.

Absolutely. But I'm only interested in contributions based on their usefulness and technical quality, which must be reviewed and discussed, sometimes in a less than gentle and favorable way. If a person is seeking to make his contribution only to increase some sort of representation or raise his self esteem and recognition and expects to be praised for the mere fact of contribution, I'm sorry, but I'm not interested and in fact opposed to such a contribution. If that is your goal, or you are not able to deal with technical criticism, then please take your energy and effort elsewhere.

...

Some day, the old guard will come to pass and who will be left standing? If the youth say that a CoC is important then it's important.

Then let them create a different project that is not Boost, with CoC and what not. Competition is good, right?

...

All we have to do is take our existing tacit Boost etiquette and put it into a written document called code-of-conduct.txt.

No, I'm opposed. CoC is a bad idea, it has only created problems and political infight in projects that adopted it. We have lived quite fine without one so far, and I don't see why we would need one now. Again, if anyone feels uncomfortable or insecure without a CoC then please choose a different project to contribute.

Vinnie Falco

6:04 p.m.

On Fri, Sep 6, 2024 at 10:35 AM Andrey Semashev via Boost wrote:

...

...
All we have to do is take our existing tacit Boost etiquette and put it into a written document called code-of-conduct.txt.

No, I'm opposed. CoC is a bad idea

I do think we could offer a better onboarding experience for new mailing list participants. There isn't a code of conduct per-se but there are a set of informal rules, for example to avoid top-posting. And I think we can do a better job of preparing people for the kind of critiques that happen on the mailing list. This could be as easy as refactoring the mailing list signup page to look nice, be modern, and also have a few friendly paragraphs explaining the culture. In particular, review announcements could have a link to the pages which offer guidance for new people who are participating in reviews, so they know what to expect and what is expected of them. While it is true that people should in theory thoroughly read the information on the website before signing up and posting messages, we could present the information in better ways. Of course some will still not read it but that's not our problem to solve. Thanks

Andrzej Krzemienski

10:11 p.m.

pt., 6 wrz 2024 o 19:12 Christian Mazakas via Boost napisał(a):

...

On Fri, Sep 6, 2024 at 9:42 AM Andrey Semashev via Boost < boost@lists.boost.org> wrote:

...
If CoC and inclusivity is what matters most to those who you refer to as "youth" then I would prefer those people to be *not* part of Boost. Let them convene in their SJW parties somewhere else, please.

You say that but no offense, this isn't about what you think. This is about what other people think.

And a good amount of the young developers I chat with on various discords say that an open-source project having a CoC is a determining factor if they're going to invest into making a contribution.

You have to understand that contributors invest their own time into a project and to Sankel's point, we should want volunteer contributions in addition to paid ones.

Some day, the old guard will come to pass and who will be left standing? If the youth say that a CoC is important then it's important.

All we have to do is take our existing tacit Boost etiquette and put it into a written document called code-of-conduct.txt.

Going back to what John said, does the file https://www.boost.org/community/policy.html satisfy the requirements that you called "code of conduct"? Is the request to change the name of the file? Regards, &rzej;

...

- Christian

_______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost

John Maddock

5:09 p.m.

On 06/09/2024 16:04, Christian Mazakas via Boost wrote:

...

Disclaimer: Alliance employee

Hi, I'm a little confused at what the Boost Foundation put forth.

The opening review email states:

...
To be clear, the review is not about deciding governance over Boost C++ library development. That remains in the hands of the Boost developer community. But TBF's proposal seems entirely to be governance-related.

In terms of asset stewardship, it's kind of a no-brainer to choose the organization that _didn't_ almost lose the boost.org domain name. Plus, the Alliance has Sam Darwin and he's infallible.

But to the Boost Foundation's credit, I found myself agreeing with a lot of the points being mentioned. Boost _should_ consider introducing a formal CoC. Boost _should_ officially migrate to CMake and being direct here: this does mean completely abandoning b2.

Perhaps ;) It would be a shame if we got too bogged down on what should or should not be in our code of conduct. We do actually have something pretty close here: https://www.boost.org/community/policy.html As for CMake, from the POV of end user experience we're nearly there already. Whether it should replace our testing infrastructure is another matter, I have always found CMake to be rather weak in that area, but then I'm very much a non-CMake user so I'm the last person you should ask ;) John.

Glen Fernandes

6:13 p.m.

On Fri, Sep 6, 2024 at 11:04 AM Christian Mazakas wrote:

...

Hi, I'm a little confused at what the Boost Foundation put forth. But TBF's proposal seems entirely to be governance-related.

In terms of asset stewardship, it's kind of a no-brainer to choose the organization that _didn't_ almost lose the boost.org domain name. Plus, the Alliance has Sam Darwin and he's infallible.

Christian, thanks for the review. If there are any questions you think Kristen could answer to address that confusion, this is the best time to ask. I have a list of questions that people have asked privately about the boost.org and boost.io domain names as well as the history of the new website, that I will post to the list tomorrow.

...

We need to revitalize Boost with the youth culture and to the youth, these things matter quite a bit.

CMake support is something we know users (of all ages, not just the youth) ask for, because we see the requests on the list, or on Slack, or other forums (r/cpp etc). Do you still see any organizational opposition to it? e.g. A number of Boost developers are in favor of it; Peter's efforts have brought us closer to having it become a first class citizen. I'm wary about importing concerns onto groups of people that haven't expressed them. If anyone knows any youth of today that want to opine, I can make it easier for them to contribute to this discussion on the list. Glen

Age (days ago)

Last active (days ago)

List overview

Download

20 comments

9 participants

participants (9)

Andrey Semashev
Andrzej Krzemienski
Christian Mazakas
Glen Fernandes
Joaquin M López Muñoz
John Maddock
Peter Dimov
Vinnie Falco
Дмитрий Архипов