Boost logo

Boost :

Subject: Re: [boost] [review queue] What to do about the library review queue?
From: Stefan Seefeld (stefan_at_[hidden])
Date: 2017-03-14 12:57:06

On 14.03.2017 08:01, Niall Douglas via Boost wrote:
> Dear Boost,
> I see that new candidate Boost libraries entering the review queue have
> exploded in recent years, with no less than *twenty-three* proposed
> libraries awaiting a review.
> As the ongoing strength and vitality of Boost is inextricably linked to
> new growth,

Is it really ?

I maintain what I have been saying for many years: Boost (as an
organization) is crushing under its own weight. There are many other
things I would consider being important for its vitality (such as
changing its mode of organization - such as into an umbrella
organization of relatively autonomous projects). But pushing for
accelerated growth is certainly not among the things I would promote.

> I think that waiting around for years for someone to
> volunteer to manage a review is not healthy.

I always thought that the "self-organized" nature of Boost processes
(including the review process) is a means to select the "generally
useful" submissions from the "esoteric corner case" ones. In other
words: if a library submitter can't gather enough interest in the wider
community to find reviewers and a review manager, it implies the
submitted project is finally not a good candidate for addition.

*That* is part of the strength of Boost (and of Open Source projects in
general, for that matter): It really represents the community's needs,
rather than what any particular party pushes through.


      ...ich hab' noch einen Koffer in Berlin...

Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at