From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-08-30 08:54:50
"Jeff Garland" <jeff_at_[hidden]> writes:
> On Sat, 28 Aug 2004 10:00:38 -0700, tom brinkman wrote
> Tom --
> A couple thoughts.
> 1) The review schedule is too aggressive. One week per review with no breaks
> is going to kill us and not give enough time for complete reviews. 1.5 weeks
> with .5 weeks in-between is more doable.
Absolutely. Or a little bit longer. 2 weeks was common in the
past. If someone's on holiday one week it gives them another week to
do a library review.
> This also gives some buffer for review run-overs. The current week
> is a reasonable exception because we have 2 libraries that overlap
> the same area.
> 2) We might need a break to finish the release, so hopefully there is some
> flexibility in the schedule.
> 3) I'm guessing boost::geometry2d isn't really under development...
> 4) These periodic reports are great -- keep up the good work!
-- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting http://www.boost-consulting.com
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk