[boost] Review manager volunteer

Subject: [boost] Review manager volunteer
From: Edward Diener (eldiener_at_[hidden])
Date: 2011-01-17 16:24:32

I am willing to be a review manager to help expedite the review of 
libraries in the review schedule which do not have a review manager 
assigned to it. Looking at the review process web page it says that the 
review wizards, whom the page says are currently John Phillips and 
Ronald Garcia, maintain a list of review manager volunteers. I do not 
know if that means I should be e-mailing directly the review wizards, so 
I decided to post this here first instead.

I have been a programmer for 33 years, am very good with C++, and have a 
pretty good understanding of the basic Boost libraries ( MPL, Type 
Traits, PP, Function Types etc. ) with which other programmers may be 
working in order to produce a library for Boost. I have also put two 
libraries in the sandbox and am working on a third which I will 
eventually upload, so I have gained some experience in producing a 
potential library for Boost. Whether that qualifies me for being a 
review manager others can decide. My heart will not be broken if it does 
not, but if I am accepted as a potential review manager I know I can do 
a good job.

Looking at the documentation of the libraries currently in the queue 
which do not have a review manager as yet, I believe I am familiar 
enough with the ideas of some of the libraries to be a review manager 
for any of these:

bitfield
conversion
join
endian
string_convert
pimpl

My own point of view, unlike what others have generally expressed, is 
that the review wizards should assign reviews to potential review 
managers, after e-mailing them to see if they would be available for a 
particular library, rather than the library implementer directly asking 
someone to review their library. I feel that way because I think there 
may be too much influence on the review manager to accept a reviewed 
library when the library implementer and the review manager are joined 
by the direct asking process. But perhaps I am wrong, especially as many 
libraries have no review manager and the review wizards do not seem to 
be assigning review managers to those libraries from some volunteer list 
which they have.

I believe it is important to break the logjam which is the current 
review schedule without keeping library implementers waiting for a 
longer and longer period of time to get their libraries reviewed, much 
less added to a Boost distribution in the future if it is accepted. The 
lack of review managers seems to be one of the major reason for this 
jamup and I would like to alleviate it in my own way, especially as I 
would like to eventually get my own libraries reviewed in the near 
future when I request it.