Re: [boost] Improving review process

Subject: Re: [boost] Improving review process
From: Rene Rivera (grafikrobot_at_[hidden])
Date: 2011-01-13 21:30:54

On 1/13/2011 2:25 PM, Edward Diener wrote:
> Once again I will say it although I do not know how to get Boost to
> change the way it presently does things with reviews: More than one
> review should go on at any one time and the period for a review should
> be much longer ( I favor one month ) to give possible reviewers more
> time to look at and review seriously a library. Imagine 3 or 4 reviews
> during each month period. That should releive a few bottlenecks.

+1

> Finally another GMane NG/mailing list for just reviews would give those
> interested in reviewing libraries a better focus on reviews and their
> responses. Call it the Boost Reviews mailing list and an appropriate
> gmane.comp.lib.boost.reviews NG.

That might address one of the problems I had as a review manager, 
mentioned it briefly on IRC today. The biggest pain of the review was 
sorting out all the emails, it takes a lot of effort & time. Especially 
since it was not just the reviews themselves, but all the ensuing 
discussions.

-- 
-- Grafik - Don't Assume Anything
-- Redshift Software, Inc. - http://redshift-software.com
-- rrivera/acm.org (msn) - grafik/redshift-software.com
-- 102708583/icq - grafikrobot/aim,yahoo,skype,efnet,gmail