Re: [boost] Updating the Boost Review Process Was: [GGL] Bost.Polygon (GTL) vs GGL - rationale

Subject: Re: [boost] Updating the Boost Review Process Was: [GGL] Bost.Polygon (GTL) vs GGL - rationale
From: Scott McMurray (me22.ca+boost_at_[hidden])
Date: 2009-11-16 08:56:35

2009/11/16 Jose <jmalv04_at_[hidden]>:
>
> I realize that there is no mention to the word "vote" in the review
> policy, just "review comments". See message below for rationale on why
> these may be good changes.
>

I strongly dislike the idea of "voting" and a correspondingly purely
objective acceptance criterion, since then you have to define whether
someone is permitted to vote, which is necessarily exclusive.

I'd be far more interested in a 2-stage process where there's a
limited review for whether something is usable, at which point is gets
into the official distribution, but under a "proposed" subdirectory.
These might not be the optimal implementations or interfaces, nor
would they need to be at all orthogonal.  A later review like the
current would then decide whether it's the correct form for the
functionality, at which point it would be promoted.