Subject: [boost] Review quality [ was stack trace review]
From: Robert Ramey (ramey_at_[hidden])
Date: 2016-12-26 11:39:39
On 12/25/16 7:18 PM, Andrey Semashev wrote:
> Second, it's not like the library does not exist before it is
> accepted. Users and the author have every opportunity to try the
> library in the field, if they want to. There is blincubator.com as
Indeed, the ability to make a library visible in a convenient way for
usage and experimentation in advance of the formal review was one of the
main goals of the inclubator. The hope was that the authors would get
enough feedback to detect and make adjustments for obvious issues in
advance of the formal review. The hope was that this would make the
review process run smoother and diminish the number of libraries
rejected in the review process.
To my disappointment it hasn't worked out that way. Libraries get very
little feedback on the blincubator or anywhere else for that matter. I
understand this as it's actualy a fair bit of work to review a library.
But that doesn't keep me from being disappointed though.
Library authors are anxious to get their library on to the review queue
and feel compelled to find a reviewer to accept the task. I understand
this as well. But still I'd like to see more "pre-review" feedback.
And a few authors have declined to post their library on the blincubator
at all. I'm sure they have their reasons, but I'm disappointed that they
don't find it compelling or necessary.
I should say I received very little feedback on my safe numerics
library. BUT I found it to be very, very, useful. It made me realize
that that I had to make a strong case for the necessity for such a
library. In hindsight it's incredible that this had never occurred to
me. Up to that point I had always assumed that the whole world was
anxiously awaiting my solution to the very obvious and glaring problem
with computing which has been around since it's inception.
So I am interested in receiving feedback on the incubator. On the other
hand, making changes of the incubator requires understanding of modern
web tools which are very, very, depressing to use for the compable C++
programmer. Oh well.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk