From: Jeff Garland (jeff_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-12-10 14:31:42
Victor A. Wagner Jr. wrote:
> I think we _could_ have picked a worse time to have a review if we'd
> only tried a little harder. How about delaying it a week and
> _really_ hitting the holidays... le't's see, we could close the
> formal review at the end of the Rose Bowl game just for pizazz.
> Sorry guys, I think this is one of the worst times to try to get
> volunteers to do anything, let alone a serious job of reviewing a new
> library. IMO, it doesn't matter if the library is perfect, there are
> enough of us< who understand the problems thoroughly, who just won't
> be able to cobble together the time to do an honest review.
> So, given that I can't review it, I'll vote NO now (I can't vote YES
> on anything I haven't read (in stark contrast to the entire House of
> Representatives in the U.S. Congress)).
> I do appeal to delay the actual review until AFTER New Years Day.
I understand it is a bad time. So is the whole summer when people are
off on vacations. In short, it's always a bad time for someone.
Personally I think one hour should be enough to do a basic review
focused on one aspect -- say documentation -- or examples. I think 3
hours should be enough for an in-depth review. Also, I've done some
off-list recruiting for review submissions and I'm hopeful that we will
have good coverage. Finally, if the end of the review is reached and it
is insufficient then the library will not be accepted and we'll have to
work something else out.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk