Subject: Re: [boost] [metaparse] Review Manager
From: Robert Ramey (ramey_at_[hidden])
Date: 2015-03-19 21:06:48
Nevin Liber wrote
> Is there a reasonable assurance that he'll get it,
Well I got some - safe numerics review - and I found it extremely useful.
> or is it just adding latency to the process?
lol - how does posting a review in advvance add latency to the process?
It doesn't change the review date.
> Of the twenty-two libraries listed, there are a whopping three reviews,
> of which are a review of your own library, and one of those is by you
> you recommend that we don't accept it into Boost. Not exactly good
My recollection is a whopping 2 reviews. One was just a test of the system.
Of course this is not an argument that posting an advance review is a bad
idea. What harm can come from it?
> The incubator is an experiment. It may succeed, or it may fail. If
> someone wishes to tie their review to it, that's fine. If they don't wish
> to, that is fine too.
> We know that you want the incubator to succeed, but
> it is unfair to expect anyone to hold up a review of their library because
> of it.
Perhaps some future review wizard might want to do such a thing, but
so far certainly no one has suggested doing this it for this or any other
library in the queue.
-- View this message in context: http://boost.2283326.n4.nabble.com/metaparse-Review-Manager-tp4673218p4673507.html Sent from the Boost - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk