Boost logo

Boost :

Subject: Re: [boost] Improving review process
From: John Maddock (boost.regex_at_[hidden])
Date: 2011-01-13 13:59:37

>> I agree that it is the library author's responsibility to find a review
>> manager, not the boost
>> community. Based on what we see happening it is clear that the libraries
>> that get reviewed and
>> eventually accepted are the ones where the author is active and
>> successful in finding a review
>> manager for themselves.
> There's a big deal of truth in that.

Indeed, and looking at we might not
be in such bad shape (no really!!), ignoring those reviewed and awaiting
results we currently have:

* 4 scheduled for review. So I guess the process is working for these :)
* 5 stalled waiting on other reviews (more than a few of these may well
become unblocked soon). I don't have a problem with this, it's very clear
on the page why they're blocked, and it's up to these authors to chivvy
along the blocking proposal when required :)
* 9 stalled waiting for a review manager - I get the sense that most of
these are small submissions - perhaps a few of questionable value - and a
few that seem to overlap. Perhaps we should have a "review sprint" and get
some of the smaller submissions out of the way en mass?

Cheers, John.

Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at