Subject: Re: [boost] Improving review process
From: Dave Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2011-01-13 16:29:38
On Thu, Jan 13, 2011 at 11:49 AM, vicente.botet
> Another case could be that the library depends on another library not yet scheduled.
That's actually no reason to hold up the review. Any dependencies can
be recoded as implementation details for final submission until
they're ready to be reviewed on their own.
-- 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