Subject: Re: [boost] Shouldn't both logging proposals be reviewed in the same formal review?
From: Thorsten Ottosen (thorsten.ottosen_at_[hidden])
Date: 2009-11-17 05:33:31
John Phillips skrev:
> As for scheduling a joint review: That was tried with the Thread Pool
> libraries and I heard many comments from people who were not happy
> reviewing two at once and no one who was happy. This included the review
> manager, the library authors and some of the reviewers. So, I am not
> inclined to run two reviews at the same time unless someone has a very
> compelling explanation for why this time would be different. I have not
> spoken with Ron about this, so I don't know if his opinion is the same
> or different.
Well, IMO having two seperate reviews of the same library is almost
meaningless **if the two libraries are both ready at the same time**.
IMO any review should include the comparison with *any* other library
that tackles the same problem. That's the only way we can make sure that
our new library has a very high quality. Any submitted library should
include such a comparison done by the author, where he explains what he
has done differently, and why his approach is better etc. Reviewers
should strive to do the same, and see if they agree with the author.
So please do "double" reviews whenever they occur.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk