Re: [boost] [Review] The review of the Boost.Logging librarystartstoday, November 7th

From: Jody Hagins (jody-boost-011304_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-11-15 12:31:23

On Tue, 15 Nov 2005 16:46:02 -0000
"Paul A Bristow" <pbristow_at_[hidden]> wrote:

> Well I'm not sure it has been in the past?
> IMO a few minor changes are OK - and desirable even.
> I don't remember a review when NO changes were required.
> Nor a product that was never modified - that's why Boost code is good?

Right.  However, we have had problems in the past where the original is
modified.  That's one reason that the original is not supposed to change
at all.  Mods are almost always needed (compiler workaround or doc
updates), but the original submission must stay.

We've also had the argument in the past as to what is being reviewed,
the newly modified work, or the original.  I'm not trying to put a new
face on it, just stating that the original submission is always supposed
to stay constant (that's what I think the original question was about,
anyway).

> IMO, as far too often, far too many fundamental issues are being
> raised far too late in the whole development and review process.

However, we do not have a pre-review stage, so it is difficult to see
how these issues would have been raised in the past.  I believe our
history shows that a submission will be rejected if it is not
satisfactory, but when the author has considered the points raised in
the review, it can be resubmitted.  I guess this is the best we can do,
and it seems to be fairly well received.