Re: [boost] Review wizards response and Boost reviews

Subject: Re: [boost] Review wizards response and Boost reviews
From: Edward Diener (eldiener_at_[hidden])
Date: 2013-10-10 15:29:13

On 10/9/2013 8:15 PM, Niall Douglas wrote:
> On 9 Oct 2013 at 19:47, Edward Diener wrote:
>
>> I tried to contact the review wizards via their e-mail addresses to
>> update some information on the Boost Formal Review Schedule page at
>> http://www.boost.org/community/review_schedule.html but have heard
>> nothing in response. I appreciate that they have a hard job to do for
>> which most people would not want the responsibility. But it does seem to
>> me, either by plan or because there appear to be no people willing to
>> act as review managers, that the Boost formal review process has
>> completely bogged down for some time now.
>
> It hasn't been announced yet, but I'll be the review manager for
> proposed Boost.TypeIndex by Antony Polukhin. Peer review is hoped for
> sometime shortly after Nov 11th, and I'll shortly be writing to all
> the maintainers of the Boost libraries affected by TypeIndex's
> addition.
>
> You're right that there is a lack of review manager volunteers. I am
> lucky to have a "free month" before I relocate from KW to somewhere
> else in the world which will employ me. If I were still working at
> BlackBerry, I'm not sure if I could commit the effort needed,
> especially after the marathon which was GSoC. Such is life in the
> contemporary western working world.
>
>> Since I am interested in getting my own library reviewed I would like to
>> volunteer to act as a Review Manager for other libraries. I have no
>> particular library in mind but I am pretty knowledgeable and interested
>> in some of the ideas of libraries on the review schedule. I have been a
>> Review Manager for a past library and think I did a pretty good job.
>
> I shortlisted those in the queue down to three I felt competent
> enough to judge. This wasn't done lightly, I looked into each library
> in the queue in some depth, and I'll freely admit that any without
> Boost styled and formatted documentation instantly got ruled out. I'd
> suggest you do the same, and suggest yourself with that shortlist to
> Ron who will probably assign you whichever of that shortlist has been
> waiting the longest.

If I did not get any answer from Ron previously, when I asked the review 
wizards to update some information on the review schedule, why should I 
think they would reply if I offered to review a particular library ? It 
does sound to me as if they are just not responding to e-mails sent to them.