Re: [boost] [xint] Formal Review Result

Subject: Re: [boost] [xint] Formal Review Result
From: Joachim Faulhaber (afojgo_at_[hidden])
Date: 2011-05-03 11:27:01

2011/5/3 Vladimir Prus <vladimir_at_[hidden]>:
> Barend Gehrels wrote:
>
>> On 30-4-2011 18:39, Vladimir Prus wrote:
>>> Chad Nelson wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Sat, 30 Apr 2011 19:00:14 +0300
>>>> Vladimir Prus<vladimir_at_[hidden]>  wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Votes
>>>>> =====
>>>>>
>>>>> YES:
>>>>>
>>>>> - Christian Henning
>>>>> - Steven Watanabe
>>>>> - Jarrad Waterloo
>>>>> - Edward Diener
>>>>> - Paul A. Bristow
>>>> Also Christopher Jefferson, Ivan Sorokin, Barend Gehrels, and Artyom
>>>> Beilis, and a "conditional yes" from Robert Stewart.
>>> Sorry for missing those. It seems like last four were missed because
>>> I was reviewing email in two sessions, and apparently some emails were
>>> marked as read in between. Also I've missed the vote from Christopher
>>> since it was on a line that started with the "quote" (">") character.
>>
>> Sorry to react on this, but I feel this is not as it should be (even if
>> apologies and reasons are given).
>>
>> It seems that 5 of 10 positive reviews had not been read at all by the
>> review manager, or at least not read during making up the review report.
>
> Thanks for giving me the benefit of doubt, and I think it's the latter
> than happened -- that is, emails were read, but not written down in
> the report.
>
>> This is not very motivating for the reviewers, neither for the library
>> writer.
>>
>> I understand that the traffic was really high, that review managers do
>> this voluntary, everybody don't have all the time, etc.
>>
>> Reviews are usually carefully written. People spend several hours on it,
>> sometimes days. Skipping these reviews is a sad thing. Writing a library
>> cost weeks, sometimes months or more. Forgetting reviews is a very sad
>> thing.
>>
>> There was somebody who recently mentioned a scoreboard on this list and
>> I now think this is a good idea, because the review manager can check if
>> all reviews are taken into account.

I second Barend's concerns and remarks. This should not happen so
often. A simple way to avoid this accident is to check with the
contributor about the vote count. They usually count extremely
precise.

Regards,
Joachim

-- 
Interval Container Library [Boost.Icl]
http://www.joachim-faulhaber.de