Thanks for the offer. A build infrastructure would be great, but
we only need to build and test stdcxx when we changes are made,
and lately we haven't been making any. The problem isn't a lack
of interest but rather a lack of time on my part (and that of
I'd love to do a maintenance release (4.2.2) and I don't think
it would even take that much effort. But unfortunately I don't
have the bandwidth to do any development work or even review
and commit other people's patches. And because the ASF won't
give commit privileges to someone who hasn't contributed any
patches we have a catch 22 that we can't replace me with
IMO, the only way to keep stdcxx alive is to fork it and move
development somewhere else, where the process isn't as rigid
as here. I know it's possible since other ASF projects have
done it. I just need to talk to the Board to find out what
the process is (which again takes time).
The next Board report for stdcxx is due so let me take the
opportunity to bring this up to see how to go about it. I'll
follow up here once I know more.
On 02/03/2011 02:40 PM, Pavel Heimlich, a.k.a. hajma wrote:
> I'm one of the guys porting KDE to Solaris and we use stdcxx extensively there.
> I just spent some time rediscovering an old stdcxx bug, which led me
> to the stdcxx site in search for any news about the project.
> I found KDE or Solaris mentioned in
> http://stdcxx.apache.org/status/2010-05.text > http://stdcxx.apache.org/status/2010-09.txt >
> I don't think I have the skills to actually make any non-trivial
> changes to the project, but I'd like to help keep stdcxx alive and see
> a bug fix release at least (although we've seen very few stdcxx issues
> so far).
> I've read in one of the statuses that you lack build&test infrastructure,
> please do let me know if there's a way to help, I know a machine (or
> two) that might be used, running Solaris 11 or OpenIndiana (the
> Solaris fork).
> P.S. although I am an Oracle employee, this has nothing to do with my
> work at Oracle, etc. (the usual disclaimer :-)