Subject: Re: [boost] [Fit] formal review starts today
From: Lee Clagett (forum_at_[hidden])
Date: 2016-03-21 03:47:22
On Mon, 14 Mar 2016 00:11:31 +0100
"Vicente J. Botet Escriba" <vicente.botet_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> Le 13/03/2016 23:14, Lee Clagett a écrit :
> > On Thu, 3 Mar 2016 12:43:10 +0100
> > "Vicente J. Botet Escriba" <vicente.botet_at_[hidden]> wrote:
[snip - everything has been covered in other posts]
> >> * Usefulness
> > I think the library has merit and would be useful to the community.
> > My reason for recommending rejection is based mainly on the idea
> > that Boost should become a collection of highly polished libraries
> > since github publishing is becoming so common. The review manager
> > should take this into account when considering my review; I think
> > Paul is capable of addressing my concerns. I also like Louis'
> > comment about justifying the purpose of the library - or at least
> > provide a better definition for the library. And how much of the
> > functionality can already be done with Hana?
> I don't reach to understand why you are rejecting the library. Is
> because of the quality of the code or the test? The global design?
> the documentation? Is there something that must be modified so you
> could accept the library?
I did not respond immediately because I wanted some feedback from Paul,
and I had to think about it some more. I do think this library should
be included in Boost (vote change by me). A follow-up review of the
requested changes and suggestions should be helpful, but I think the
Github issue and comment system can do this quite well too. There
appears to be a special label for "review", so issues are less likely
(than past cases) to be overlooked. The documentation is the part that
is likely to suffer on the Github system though; somehow feedback /
editing on that should be encouraged.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk