Subject: Re: [boost] [peer review queue tardiness] Cleaning out the Boost review queue
From: Niall Douglas (s_sourceforge_at_[hidden])
Date: 2015-04-02 16:09:52
On 2 Apr 2015 at 12:42, Emil Dotchevski wrote:
> My concern is that while encouraging experts to act as review managers is a
> good thing, encouraging developers of arbitrary experience (there is no
> screening process for submitting a library for Boost review) to act as
> review managers probably isn't.
I know what you mean.
However acting as review manager requires quite a different skill
set. All you really need is the ability to tell whether a point in an
expert review has merit or not, and therefore to weight it
appropriately in the report and recommendation. You don't need to be
expert yourself, just "expert aware" if that makes sense. And if a
review manager wrote a report which made no sense, people would call
them on it.
Besides, looking at the libraries in the formal review queue as I've
been doing a lot of recently there isn't one where the programmer
isn't well above average. I think Boost library review queue
submission is probably highly self selecting - your average
programmer isn't willing to sacrifice the blood and treasure to
submit a library for review.
-- ned Productions Limited Consulting http://www.nedproductions.biz/ http://ie.linkedin.com/in/nialldouglas/
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk