From: Jeff Garland (jeff_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-09-08 18:31:23
On Tue, 07 Sep 2004 14:48:52 -0700, tom brinkman wrote
> My Concerns:
> 4) To few reviews of the boost libraries. I would like to see more
> people participate in the review process.
This is one of the reasons for making sure there an adequete time and
non-overlapping review period. If there are too many reviews on top of each
other the reviewers are sapped and unable to participate fully.
As for getting more people to help review, I just don't know. People
volunteer what time they can in the areas they can. The only thing I can
think is if we advertise to a wider audience -- like posting the review
schedule up on comp.lang.c++.
> 5) The policy of not
> allowing overalaping review dates means that I will not be able to
> plan ahead more than about 2 to 3 weeks.
I don't think this is the case. If we reschedule the current docet with
adequate time and buffer between we won't need to extend and change the
schedule as we go. When reviews are rescheduled you might want to ask the
review manager to let you know if he thinks the library is large and might
need more than the standard 10 day period. Then you can tack on a few extra
insurance days for the large libs.
> 6) Not having firm start
> dates could be a source of frustration for library authors if they
> have other commitments.
I see no reason why you can't plan out at least 2-3 months or 4-6 reviews
ahead. That should be plenty of notice.
> 7) The reason for not having overalpping
> reviews is based on the preference for a flexible review schedule.
> This flexibility, however, has a large cost in terms of not being
> able to provide firm start dates for our library authors.
No, it is quality of reviews that is my only concern. As for flexibility,
even with additional time and buffer there may come a point where we have to
bite the bullet and reschedule, but I think it will be fairly rare. Still, it
will be worth it if we need the extra time to get the review right. And, of
course, once a review is scheduled an author or review manager might have to
drop out because of an emergency that is higher priority -- so the review
schedule is necessarily a plan that will not be followed exactly.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk