Re: [boost] Boost Incubator Status Report

Subject: Re: [boost] Boost Incubator Status Report
From: Niall Douglas (s_sourceforge_at_[hidden])
Date: 2014-11-06 05:11:46

On 6 Nov 2014 at 12:15, Vladimir Prus wrote:

> Personally, I would say incubator would need considerable work before it
> can become useful for library reviews. Say, if I can made per-line
> comments on proposed library code, like gerrit does, it would be rather
> useful. If I can create design issues right away, so that they can be
> listed later and reviewed, it would be rather useful. It does not appear
> to me that wordpess post with comments is better than a thread in a mail
> client. At least mail client allows to collapse a subthread, or delete
> it. 

Github provides an excellent API 
(https://developer.github.com/v3/repos/comments/) which does exactly 
as you ask.

Even a read only summary of the comments posted about a library would 
be very useful. And not too demanding on Github if cached via a 
varnish reverse proxy (i.e. we don't have to pay Github for the 
bandwidth).

I also wouldn't rule out using JSON to live embed the github stream 
into the Incubator. Github eats its own dog food, so you can make a 
mashed up Incubator reinterpretation of Github with Incubator 
semantics. Then people can live review code on the Incubator, and it 
appears in Github too.

This is where I was coming from with having the SC pay for expert 
advice and consultancy. This sort of web programming pays as well as 
top C++ programmers, and for good reason, yet it is none of our core 
competency.

Niall

-- 
ned Productions Limited Consulting
http://www.nedproductions.biz/ 
http://ie.linkedin.com/in/nialldouglas/