Subject: Re: [boost] Formalising the review process into a well specified workflow
From: Glen Fernandes (glen.fernandes_at_[hidden])
Date: 2015-06-03 11:59:58
On Wed, Jun 3, 2015 at 8:28 AM, Niall Douglas wrote:
> This is all about saving everybody time, hassle and confusion. Not
> about prespecifying how reviews are written, understood, or
I think you're blowing this incident a little out of proportion. Just
a difference of expectations on both the author and a reviewer (or
two) is not so catastrophic that it requires an overhaul of the review
process involving paid investment in some automated submission system.
If anything is essential for reviewers to expect, for library authors
to do, it can be clarified on the formal review process website.
Rather, I hope that nobody needs to be funded to add more helpful
detail for reviewers, library authors, review managers at
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk