From: Peter Dimov (pdimov_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-06-06 19:51:12
Eric Niebler wrote:
> Peter Dimov wrote:
>> It is not irrelevant at all. If disputes only occur one time in a
>> hundred, there is no need to recruit 100 volunteer review managers
>> just because one of them might need to break a tie. We can just say
>> "Eric Niebler breaks ties if they occur" and carry on.
> That's a terrible system! I'd rather you do it. :-) I would have been
> a very bad person to break a tie in the ASIO review, for instance. I
> know very little about network programming. The idea is that the
> tie-breaker person for any review should have some domain knowledge
> and can make an informed decision, should it be necessary. There is
> no one person qualified to break ties in every possible domain.
The idea is that the knowledge needs to come from the reviewers, not from
the tie-breaker person. Anybody qualified and willing to act as a review
manager will obviously be qualified and willing to write a review, but the
converse is - as we are observing - not necessarily true. If the review
process does not produce a sufficiently solid case for acceptance, the
library is rejected. It is the responsibility of the submitter to present
his/her case citing reviews as supporting material such that the busy
tie-breaker person/group is able to make a quick decision.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk