Subject: Re: [boost] [Dataflow] [Review] Dataflow review has ended
From: Andrey Semashev (andrey.semashev_at_[hidden])
Date: 2008-09-12 12:21:05
David Abrahams wrote:
> on Thu Sep 11 2008, Gennadiy Rozental <rogeeff-AT-gmail.com> wrote:
>> Jaakko JÃ¤rvi <jarvi <at> cs.tamu.edu> writes:
>>> The number of reviews for the dataflow library was very low (one, positive).
>> This seems to be general theme nowdays. Maybe we can have some kind of
>> pre-registration for people planing to submit the review and reschedule it if
>> this number is less than some threshold (5?)
> This seems like a good idea. There is supposed to be a "gauge interest"
> phase to the submission process. Is that failing to work, or are we
> ignoring its results, or are people claiming interest and then not
> submitting reviews?
I think, one significant reason for such a situation is that the delay
between such a query of interest (and submitting the library review) and
the actual review is quite big. For example, the recently reviewed
Boost.FSM was in the queue for more than a year, IIRC. Although there
were reasons for the delay in this particular case, it's not a sole
example - many libraries don't even have review managers for
months/years. So when the review happens, many potential reviewers that
were excited about the library while the interest poll, now either are
gone or found/developed another solution for their needs.
I have no concrete suggestion for improvement on this, except maybe to
limit the period of waiting in the review queue. OTOH, I'm not very
happy with the suggestion as a potential library submitter, since my
library could be simply bounced off from the queue for reasons I have no
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk