From: Thorsten Ottosen (nesotto_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-07-27 06:42:28
"David Abrahams" <dave_at_[hidden]> wrote in message news:upt6ibdyw.fsf_at_boost-consulting.com...
> It's up to you whether
>to introduce yet another kind of review process, but I'm concerned
>that might end up with a hodgepodge of not-very-thoroughly-inspected
>and not-very-interoperable components. So, how will we keep the
>overall quality high?
I propose that we use some time to establish a reasonable amount of categories of algorithms. We already have string related,
I'm working on statistics related, and there are probably more categories out there. Then, once we have these categories, one
or two persons (preferable persons with domain knowlegde) must take responsibility for the overall quality of that library and
inspect new mini-submissions and work with the new authors to ensure their
contribution will fit into the overall scheme. Then a formal mini-review should follow.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk