Subject: Re: [boost] [Bug Sprint] Policy on MIA maintainers
From: Dave Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-12-18 14:07:36
At Sat, 18 Dec 2010 10:39:34 -0600,
Jim Bell wrote:
> How about this question: as of this moment, we have X number of patches
> already in Trac. What's the average quality of those patches? (If a
> library has diverged from a patch, don't count it, as that's not fair to
> the patch.)
> See where I'm going? If 97% of existing patches would be accepted, how
> much apprehension should you have about the next one? (Or if only 40%...)
> Or, if a Boost-trusted developer not intimately familiar with the
> library can, in two minutes (or ten? twenty?) determine that the patch
> is valid, with 97% accuracy, what would that mean?
> And if the patch had to do directly with a regression failure, how would
> that change things?
Many of the patches I've seen come in seem to be perfectly good code
but lack docs and tests. How should we classify those?
-- Dave Abrahams BoostPro Computing http://www.boostpro.com
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk