From: Jeff Garland (jeff_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-01-25 18:30:32
On Sun, 25 Jan 2004 23:11:41 +0100, Jens Maurer wrote
> David Abrahams wrote:
> > Thomas and I discussed both options (I think [review] would be a more
> > appropriate tag). The thing I like about the mailing list is that
> > review commentary has a value all its own, and it would be great to be
> > able to search reviews separately.
> Just to clarify: The "boost-review" list would be for review requests
> only, the actual review still happening on the main boost list?
> Discussion on the library itself should probably not be fractioned
> into the regular boost discussion and boost-review.
I don't like the idea of a mailing list to solve this problem. Remember, the
root cause of the issue is that the review manager is too busy to read the
development list and keep up with his duties. I also don't think a new tag is
going to do much given that the review process currently states:
...the author sends a message requesting a formal review
to the mailing list. Please use a subject in the form
"Review Request: library"...
which means that a filter on review request should be enough to filter things
I think some simple additions to the submission process would solve the
'heads-up' to the review manager problem:
A copy of the Review Request posting should be sent directly to
the review wizard (email here). If the review wizard does not
respond with an acknowledgement within 48 hours another request
should be made.
Also, note that the entire discussion of the Review Wizard is on the Formal
Review Process page and I personally think most that section would be better
on the submission process page making it clearer that the review wizard will
schedule the review.
Finally, it seems to me the real solution is to either split the duties or
find another review wizard volunteer. I'm willing to spend a couple hours a
month on this if it would help, so Thomas send me an email off-list if you
have something you want to offload on me. Also, I don't read every email on
the dev list, but I could certainly make sure that if new review requests are
posted the author gets a prompt answer....
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk