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
| 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
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 A Bristow, Prizet Farmhouse, Kendal, Cumbria, LA8 8AB UK
+44 1539 561830 Mobile +44 7714 33 02 04
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk