Subject: Re: [boost] Improving review process
From: Vladimir Prus (vladimir_at_[hidden])
Date: 2011-01-13 14:08:12
John Maddock wrote:
>>> 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
> https://svn.boost.org/trac/boost/wiki/ReviewScheduleLibraries 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?
Note that XInt is not listed on that page ;-) Do we need to have two
pages with review schedule?
-- Vladimir Prus Mentor Graphics +7 (812) 677-68-40
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk