Subject: Re: [boost] Boost Incubator Status Report
From: Felix Uhl (felix.uhl_at_[hidden])
Date: 2014-11-07 18:48:24
Robert Ramey wrote:
> If you select the "Display Statistics" Button on the Safe Numerics and
> display the last 60 days of activity, you can see that the library page has
> 50 visits. This is not a huge number. A book on Amazon might
> sell 1000 copies and get a couple of reviews (most of whom are
> likely the author's relatives). So as the incubator becomes more
> a "go to" place to look for libraries, the question of small number
> of reviews would solve itself. (hopefully).
It seems to me that the whole point that is missing from the
incubator is actual usage of it. I like the concept a lot, but
do you actually have any plans on how to increase the usage?
Just adding features isnât going to help as long as you havenât
reached a critical point in community size where people start spreading
the word on new features.
I think this is a very inherent problem to a programmers way of
thinking: We envision a great platform, a great framework, a great tool,
and set out to implement it, but after doing so, have no idea on
how to do follow-up work: Financials, Community building and management,
âmarketingâ or just garnering interest in your project in the first place.
What you want to do with the incubator is great, and if it gets
going it will quite surely be a great addition to boost.
But how will you get it going?
Von: Robert Ramey
Gesendet: âFreitagâ, â7â. âNovemberâ â2014 â23â:â57
Edward Diener-3 wrote
> Other than lengthening the formal review process to encourage more
> people to participate I do not see any means to get people more
> interested in reviewing Boost libraries. As far as the incubator is
> concerned I feel it is a good idea but nobody is using it to comment on
> As far as Boost reviews it appears that most programmers are
> afraid to even make comments about a potential library in which they may
> be interested. Maybe the specter of C++ experts scares them away. Maybe
> they feel that they might look foolish if they make a comment which is
> based on just a partial understanding of the library involved.
If you select the "Display Statistics" Button on the Safe Numerics and
display the last 60 days of activity, you can see that the library page has
50 visits. This is not a huge number. A book on Amazon might
sell 1000 copies and get a couple of reviews (most of whom are
likely the author's relatives). So as the incubator becomes more
a "go to" place to look for libraries, the question of small number
of reviews would solve itself. (hopefully). And of course if one
can make a review at the moment he's decided to use or discard
the library, it's more likely that, being in a state of ecstasy or
frustration, he'll display his feelings by making a review while
the facts and emotion are fresh in his mind.
> Finally there is a decided problem with the lack of people willing to be
> review managers for a library.
Again, if we had more "pre-reviews" getting a review manager would
be a snap.
a) a library with a large number of negative pre-reviews will likely
not even be selected for review.
b) a library with no reviews suggests that it's not getting enough
usage to be useful so maybe it's not worth reviewing.
b) a library with a large number of positive reviews - it's easy to
be the review manager.
c) for the rest - well, at least the manager knows what he's in for.
That might make it easier.
In short, I would hope if we can make the incubator a success, it
will help with the shortage of review managers.
If any library in the incubator ever gets enough reviews, and gets
reviewed, and passes review, I intend to leave all the reviews
on display indefinitely. In fact, I intend to allow anyone to post
review in the future. Current boost libraries vary a lot in quality
but our current setup doesn't make that visible.
View this message in context: http://boost.2283326.n4.nabble.com/Boost-Incubator-Status-Report-tp4668747p4668821.html
Sent from the Boost - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk