From: Thorsten Ottosen (nesotto_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-07-27 12:47:14
"Doug Gregor" <dgregor_at_[hidden]> wrote in message news:7DEAB5E4-DFD3-11D8-BD44-000D932B7224_at_cs.indiana.edu...
| On Jul 27, 2004, at 6:42 AM, Thorsten Ottosen wrote:
| > contribution will fit into the overall scheme. Then a formal
| > mini-review should follow.
| At what point are there enough algorithms under the same category that
| we should just call it a "full" review?
Good question! I don't gave an definite answer.
I would prefer that the main contribution is organized by a few people; this main contribution
should then be given a full review. And then
extra small contributions are mini-reviewed. Take the string-algorithms as an example. I hope Pavol will encourage people
to add extra functions and work out their interface with him and others on the list.
I don't see the first real review happening without some group with the main responsibility. And I don't see very small
contributions happening on their own because I fear the big picture is lost.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk