Some weeks ago Michael Glassford posted a question about the same subject. But as far as I can remeber without any answer. Did I miss something? Mike stated, that the original author silently disappeared from the list. The last relevant CVS commits have been done by a person named bill_kempf 11 months ago. Is this just a nickname for William Kempf? I like to restate the question, and also would offer to spend some of my time for helping in maintainance of the thread library. The submission_process.htm page also deals with Lifecycle, and says: "If you no longer can or wish to maintain your library, please post a message on the Boost developers mailing list and help someone else take over as the library maintainer." Does this also imply, that the only way to deal with an obviously silent maintainer, is to submit a totally new review request for a replacement library to move on with an otherwise stalled library? Regards, Roland
Roland wrote:
Some weeks ago Michael Glassford posted a question about the same subject. But as far as I can remeber without any answer. Did I miss something?
Not unless I missed it, too.
Mike stated, that the original author silently disappeared from the list. The last relevant CVS commits have been done by a person named bill_kempf 11 months ago. Is this just a nickname for William Kempf?
Yes.
I like to restate the question, and also would offer to spend some of my time for helping in maintainance of the thread library.
As I have already done also. Since then I've been familiarizing myself with the parts of the Boost.Thread library I hadn't used yet, tracking down discussions that would help me understand the decisions that were made in the current version of the library, and looking at changes that have already been added to thread_dev branch in CVS. As I mentioned offlist to Roland this morning, I'm hoping after the 1.31.0 release happens to start moving newer Boost.Thread code that already exists in the thread_dev branch to the main branch, eventually including improved versions of new classes that exist there (such as the read-write lock stuff) and maybe a couple submissions of my own and others. At the same time I would hope to include fixes of any known problems that haven't already been fixed in the thread_dev branch. It's worth mentioning that, as I'm not the owner or official maintainer of the library, the approach I was hoping to take in doing these things was first to discuss any significant proposed changes on this list, then actually commit them to CVS only after consensus was reached.
The submission_process.htm page also deals with Lifecycle, and says: "If you no longer can or wish to maintain your library, please post a message on the Boost developers mailing list and help someone else take over as the library maintainer." Does this also imply, that the only way to deal with an obviously silent maintainer, is to submit a totally new review request for a replacement library to move on with an otherwise stalled library?
Regards, Roland
Mike
Roland wrote:
I like to restate the question, and also would offer to spend some of my time for helping in maintainance of the thread library.
As I have already done also. Since then I've been familiarizing myself with the parts of the Boost.Thread library I hadn't used yet,
Michael Glassford wrote: tracking
down discussions that would help me understand the decisions that were made in the current version of the library, and looking at changes that have already been added to thread_dev branch in CVS.
As I mentioned offlist to Roland this morning, I'm hoping after the 1.31.0 release happens to start moving newer Boost.Thread code that already exists in the thread_dev branch to the main branch, eventually including improved versions of new classes that exist there (such as the read-write lock stuff) and maybe a couple submissions of my own and others. At the same time I would hope to include fixes of any known problems that haven't already been fixed in the thread_dev branch.
It's worth mentioning that, as I'm not the owner or official maintainer of the library, the approach I was hoping to take in doing these things was first to discuss any significant proposed changes on this list, then actually commit them to CVS only after consensus was reached.
I meant to add that, for my part, your help or anyone else's is very welcome: as I've mentioned before, the time I can spend on the Boost.Thread library is pretty limited. Also, my knowledge of the pthreads and Macintosh implementations is extremely limited, so I would require help with those in any case. Mike
Yes. I had corresponded with him about Boost.Thread in the past, but he hasn't responded to my mail in months. Others have tried as well. Mike "Bronek Kozicki" <brok@rubikon.pl> wrote in message news:1eivol4b8biuk$.17yia3dr7hbr3.dlg@40tude.net...
On Thu, 29 Jan 2004 16:13:46 +0100 (W. Europe Standard Time), Roland wrote:
named bill_kempf 11 months ago. Is this just a nickname for William Kempf?
have anybody tried to contact him using private channels ?
B.
_______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
On Fri, 30 Jan 2004 07:29:53 -0500, Michael Glassford wrote:
Yes. I had corresponded with him about Boost.Thread in the past, but he hasn't responded to my mail in months. Others have tried as well.
Hm, does anybody here have some other form of contact with him or his family? Just to make sure, he's aware we are going to develop this library without his participation (other thoughts are passing through my head, but I will not share it here). B.
participants (2)
-
Bronek Kozicki -
Michael Glassford -
Roland -
Russell Hind