Re: [boost] is review system in place is extremely slow? (was Re:[rfc] rcpp)

Subject: Re: [boost] is review system in place is extremely slow? (was Re:[rfc] rcpp)
From: vicente.botet (vicente.botet_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-02-26 03:27:20

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Daniel James" <daniel_james_at_[hidden]>
To: <boost_at_[hidden]>
Sent: Friday, February 26, 2010 9:08 AM
Subject: Re: [boost] is review system in place is extremely slow? (was Re:[rfc] rcpp)

> 
> On 26 February 2010 04:15, Andrey Semashev <andrey.semashev_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>> On 02/26/2010 02:04 AM, Daniel James wrote:
>>>
>>> Since it looks unlikely that Boost.Atomic is going to put be up for
>>> review in the foreseeable future,
>>
>> Is that so? Is it known why?
> 
> That's the impression I got from this thread. Correct me if I'm wrong.
> 
>>> delaying another library to
>>> encourage it would be counter productive.
>>
>> I think helping the author to bring the library into Boost would do a better
>> job to the community.
> 
> That's a good idea if someone is willing to do it and it looks like
> getting good results. Otherwise it's worthless.
> 
> If you consider Boost.Move, it's author is a major boost contributor
> and it's still taking it's time. Meanwhile, several libraries are
> using their own move emulation, which isn't ideal but it works fine.

Why do you say the author of Boost.Move is taking his time? I though the library was ready and waiting/looking for review managers volunters.
 
> Is it really a good idea to delay a library that's apparently ready
> until three other libraries are fully reviewed and in trunk? That's
> just making a slow process slower.

I would not wait until the libraries are in trunk for a review. I will just plan the review of Boost.Task after the review of Boost.Move and Boost.Fiber.

When I raised this discussion I expected that some review managers would volunter for these libraries, so I could planify my own. For the moment this has not been the case. :(

Best,Vicente