RE: [boost] Re: Divergent Paths in Boost?

From: Paul A. Bristow (boost_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-11-04 18:25:19

| -----Original Message-----
| From: boost-bounces_at_[hidden]
| [mailto:boost-bounces_at_[hidden]]On Behalf Of Rob Stewart
| Sent: Monday, November 03, 2003 5:50 PM
| To: boost_at_[hidden]
| Cc: boost_at_[hidden]
| Subject: Re: [boost] Re: Divergent Paths in Boost?
|
 I think his return with a new design that
| > meets with nearly unanimous approval proves that the review process
| > is working.
|
| Wouldn't that review have gone better with the approach I've
| suggested?
|
| --
| Rob Stewart                           stewart_at_[hidden]
| Software Engineer                     http://www.sig.com
| Susquehanna International Group, LLP  using std::disclaimer;

If he had not been so admirably persistent, he might easily have given up!

Had he known that his work-so-far was a 'Release Candidate', he would be likely
to persevere.

This is why I suggested a two-stage acceptance process.
(And I think the carrot of final acceptance might help improve documentation,
which for some items is less than high quality).

I also note that several reviews are dominated by a very small number of
reviewers, whose expertise is often impressive (if sometimes excessively
focussed on a few aspects), but whose coverage is inevitably less than that of
scores of users-in-anger.

Paul

Paul A Bristow, Prizet Farmhouse, Kendal, Cumbria, LA8 8AB  UK
[phone]   Mobile [phone]
mailto:pbristow_at_[hidden]