From: Thorsten Ottosen (nesotto_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-09-09 02:04:48
"John Torjo" <john.lists_at_[hidden]> wrote in message
| Thomas Wenisch wrote:
| > On Wed, 8 Sep 2004, tom brinkman wrote:
| >>With 10-15 days allocated per review and a 5-10 day buffer, we will be
| >>to review at-most 1 to 2 reviews per month or 12 to 24 libraries per year.
| > A goal of 24 review per year strikes me as far too ambitious. I think 12
| > libraries is a more realistic goal (and allows for some dead time, such as
| > right before a release, where no reviews are in progress).
| I second that. 12 reviews per year is quite enough.
I would rather see a number that reflects how big the libraries are. Some are
small, some are huge.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk