Subject: Re: [boost] Shouldn't both logging proposals be reviewed in the same formal review?
From: Stewart, Robert (Robert.Stewart_at_[hidden])
Date: 2009-11-20 08:57:35
Gottlob Frege wrote:
> Review Lib A
> comment/ask for changes/ etc
> Review Lib B
> comment/ask for changes/etc
> reject/approve A, B
> ie don't reject/approve A before reviewing B.
Lib A would be left in limbo for an indeterminate time, with this approach, which isn't particularly fair either.
The assumption in this entire discussion is, of course, that no reviewer of Lib A knows of or considers Lib B when reviewing Lib A. It seems reasonable to dictate that a review manager alert potential reviewers to known competing library(ies) at the start of Lib A's review. Reviewers can then decide, quite independently, whether to examine the competing library(ies) when reviewing Lib A. If Lib B gives a reviewer a reason to dislike something that might otherwise have been thought not unacceptable in Lib A, that reviewer might then find fault with Lib A and vote against or conditionally for it. If a reviewer doesn't examine Lib B, then Lib A might be found worthy of acceptance despite reservations or some level of discomfort.
Boost is about promoting C++ and library ideas, with an eye to improving or extending the language and standard library. If there are multiple libraries for the same purpose in Boost, then that implies that more discussion and design is necessary to find the right balance of features, power, and simplicity for a version to be in the next standard or to remain in Boost long term. Competition is good. Duplication isn't. I doubt we'll get much of the latter, but if so, that implies that merging competing libraries will be that much easier.
Rob Stewart robert.stewart_at_[hidden]
Software Engineer, Core Software using std::disclaimer;
Susquehanna International Group, LLP http://www.sig.com
IMPORTANT: The information contained in this email and/or its attachments is confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately by reply and immediately delete this message and all its attachments. Any review, use, reproduction, disclosure or dissemination of this message or any attachment by an unintended recipient is strictly prohibited. Neither this message nor any attachment is intended as or should be construed as an offer, solicitation or recommendation to buy or sell any security or other financial instrument. Neither the sender, his or her employer nor any of their respective affiliates makes any warranties as to the completeness or accuracy of any of the information contained herein or that this message or any of its attachments is free of viruses.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk