Subject: Re: [boost] Boost.DLL formal review is ongoing
From: Niall Douglas (s_sourceforge_at_[hidden])
Date: 2015-07-04 13:23:31
On 4 Jul 2015 at 9:57, Robert Ramey wrote:
> >> - Should the library be accepted?
> > Yes, conditional on the items below.
> A number of "Conditions" follows
> Just so I understand. Do you think the library should not be accepted
> if it fails to fulfill any one of the "Conditions" listed?
Sorry if my tone was a bit harsh in my review. I just wrote a
difficult email regarding the Boost SC before it, and I am not in a
good mood from that.
My review was my recommendation to the review manager. I believe he
can choose from people's reviews what to include in his final report,
so he could choose to not follow any or all of my recommendations.
That's always been the way till now surely? When I review managed
Antony's TypeIndex, I tried to list the consensus points raised most
commonly as the basis of the decision, and I mentioned those outlier
points in a footnote at the end more for people's interest and
Knowing Antony, I can't see any of those conditions being a problem
except the standalone support. That's a *lot* of additional work. I
would love if he invested that work, but it is no personal problem
for me if he chooses not to. And I would very much understand if he
-- 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