Re: [boost] [peer review queue tardiness] [was Cleaning out the Boost review queue] Review Queue member requirements

Subject: Re: [boost] [peer review queue tardiness] [was Cleaning out the Boost review queue] Review Queue member requirements
From: Vladimir Prus (vladimir_at_[hidden])
Date: 2015-04-02 11:09:25

On 04/02/2015 04:13 PM, Niall Douglas wrote:

>>     The more recent creation of the incubator probably makes this
>> practice outdated, and I expect newer libraries under development will
>> receive more valuable attention in the incubator than in the queue. As a
>> community member, I would support moving such libraries out of the queue
>> and into the incubator, but preferably with developer agreement.
>
> I would far prefer a scoreboard based system which shows a ranked
> list of libraries by quality score. Auto generated from a database,
> of course.

It would seem that automatic scoring of libraries is both hard technically,
and likely to result in arguments.

>>     Testing policy is a more difficult question in my mind. It has not
>> been the history of Boost to require any specific testing infrastructure
>> (or most other sorts of infrastructure) for libraries. There have been
>> times when this non-requirement has increased complexity, but there have
>> also been times when experimentation has found better solutions. As a
>> community member, I'm wary of forcing standardization, and would need
>> some pretty persuasive arguments to support it.
>
> Requiring Travis support does not cause the exclusion of any other
> form of testing, it just sets an absolute minimum bar to pass - a
> minimum bar that I might add is increasingly becoming the bar for ALL
> open source projects, so by not requiring it Boost looks behind the
> times to the wider open source community.

While Travis is a convenient tool for some purposes, it's just tool to
run scripts on commits. Having .travis.yml in a repository does not say
much about the quality of the code per se. Did you mean a more specific
suggestion?

Also, it does not support Windows, for all I know, whereas Boost is all
about portable C++, which very much includes Windows.

-- 
Vladimir Prus
CodeSourcery / Mentor Embedded
http://vladimirprus.com