Subject: Re: [boost] [process] [sorting] [singularity] [compute] [others] Who needs review manager?
From: Rob Stewart (robertstewart_at_[hidden])
Date: 2014-09-14 09:44:35
On September 14, 2014 6:24:16 AM EDT, Antony Polukhin <antoshkka_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>2014-09-14 0:25 GMT+04:00 Robert Ramey <ramey_at_[hidden]>:
>> Antony Polukhin wrote
>> > I'll take a closer look to the library and write a personal note
>> > comments/notes as soon as I get some free time.
>> > But first of all, I'll take care of the Compute review :-)
>> I'm wondering if perhaps you've got confused about the differing
>> of review manager vs reviewer. IRC a review manager doesn't review
>> libraries himself, he reviews the reviews of others, weighs them and
>> arrives at a acceptance/rejection. Think the US court system
>> judge - review manager
>> jury - reviewers.
There's a problem with the analogy because we do expect the Review Manager to ensure the case is ready for court and the defense is fully prepared, so to speak.
>I'm not going to write a full review of the library, I'm just trying to
>satisfy the first bullet for Review manager:
>In other words, there is a need to look through the sources, docs and
>system, make sure that installation notes are sufficient, tell the
>about missing/weak parts.
Absolutely correct. I suggest issuing a different word than "review"in the future, however. Perhaps "examine" or "study" would serve.
(Sent from my portable computation engine)