Re: [boost] Quality assurance (was Re: [tools][bcp] using boost internally in other libraries)

From: Douglas Gregor (doug.gregor_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-09-26 11:58:51

On Sep 26, 2005, at 8:48 AM, Richard Jennings wrote:
> So I'd support the idea of a page called something like Quality  
> Assurance
> Plan.
> Perhaps a section for library development and one on Boost releases  
> with
> links
> to the existing guidelines.

This would be interesting.

> One thing I don't see documented is how review managers are selected
> (beyond
> there being a queue which the Review Wizard manages).  The peer review
> allows
> anyone to submit comments and it's up to the review manager and  
> library
> author to consider them.  How do we know that the review manager has
> suitable
> experience of Boost and C++ (or whatever) to carry out his/her role?

Review manages are long-time, established members of the Boost  
community and are almost exclusively authors of existing Boost  
libraries. They are implicitly trusted by the Boost community to make  
sound decisions.

> Ultimately it seems that the quality of Boost rests on the  
> experience of
> its
> library authors and reviewers, so how does an observer assess that?

Given that all library authors and reviewers are volunteers, I'm not  
sure how we can assess them as a group.

     Doug