Boost logo

Boost :

Subject: Re: [boost] Improving review process
From: Edward Diener (eldiener_at_[hidden])
Date: 2011-01-13 21:54:46

On 1/13/2011 9:30 PM, Rene Rivera wrote:
> 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 relieve 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
>> 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.

I think reviews tend to get lost amid the other issues brought up on
this NG, and therefore a separate mailing list/GMane NG would make it
easier to be aware, review, and respond to just reviews. This would
especially be true if there were 3 or 4 reviews going on at the same
time over a longer period.

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