Subject: Re: [boost] Review Process [was: [SQL-Connectivity] Is Boost interested in CppDB (license changed to BSL)?]
From: Joachim Faulhaber (afojgo_at_[hidden])
Date: 2011-01-18 04:30:09
2011/1/11 Dave Abrahams <dave_at_[hidden]>:
> At Tue, 11 Jan 2011 02:56:47 +0100,
> Joachim Faulhaber wrote:
>> 2011/1/10 Frank Mori Hess <frank.hess_at_[hidden]>:
>> >> So should I do same mistake with CppDB and wait for another year to get
>> >> it reviewed and maintain two versions?
>> > Just to put out an idea: it seems to me developers tend to be more
>> > interested in submitting libraries than doing reviews or being review
>> > managers. Maybe boost could balance the scales by requiring library
>> > submitters to either be a review manager or review a couple submissions
>> > from others before their library can be accepted.
>> That's what I thought:
>> Maybe it's time to refresh those ideas and to implement them instead
>> of only discussing them.
> +1. What do the review wizards think of this idea? If they're on
> board, I don't think there's anything standing in the way.
And the vision that was planted in my brain
Within the sound of silence . . .
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk