From: Iain Hanson (Iain.Hanson_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-03-01 07:14:14
On Tue, 2005-03-01 at 02:56 +0100, Pavel Vozenilek wrote:
> "Jonathan Turkanis" wrote:
> > I think the review should be extended. If you do so,
> > I will commit to writing a
> > review, even though I don't know much about FSMs.
I am also working on a review of the library and will submit it in a
couple of days.
> > I have not read the FSM reviews yet, but unfortunately IMO even if all the
> > reviews are very favorable there simply have not been enough yet to
> > justify
> > accepting a medium sized library. It looks to me like only four people
> > other
> > than you and Andreas have posted on FSM so far.
> Perhaps it could be interpreted: as the library reached
> mature state where everybody's happy enough.
No. I think that silence is probably better interpreted as apathy or I
don't have enough time to review something of this size and do it
justice. I would not like to see libraries adopted into boost by default
when they have not received a decent review. Just my 2p worth.
> I feel current model of reviews is not designed
> to deal with big libraries well.
I very much agree.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk