Re: [boost] [review queue] What to do about the library review queue?

Subject: Re: [boost] [review queue] What to do about the library review queue?
From: Michael Caisse (mcaisse-lists_at_[hidden])
Date: 2017-03-16 21:53:49

On 3/16/17 11:24, Edward Diener via Boost wrote:
> On 3/16/2017 10:49 AM, Michael Caisse via Boost wrote:
>>

<snip other stuff>

>> * Not having a review manager might be an indicator of not enough
>>   interest in a library. It is the job of the author to ensure there
>>   is enough interest by the community. Perhaps the author hasn't done
>>   enough promotion. Maybe more solicitation on the ML is required or
>>   perhaps people just don't find the solution interesting. One person
>>   saying, "that sounds like a neat library!" shouldn't constitute
>>   interest.
> 
> I dislike the idea that if someone creates a worthy library as a
> possible addition to Boost, and gets enough initial discussion so that
> an addition to Boost's review queue of that library is made, that person
> must continually promote that library so that there is enough interest
> in Boost so that someone, anyone, is willing to be the review manager
> for that library. Why should this always be necessary in the face of the
> fact that very few of the people who contribute to Boost, via
> discussions on this mailing list and work on various libraries or work
> on other areas of the Boost infrastructure, are willing to be review
> managers ? Certainly this situation is not the library submitter's
> fault. BTW this situation, vis a vis being a review manager, is not in
> any way a criticism of all those people who contribute to Boost and
> neither have the time or inclination or interest to server as a review
> manager for a library in the review queue.
> 

It is up to the library submitter to garner interest in their library.
Do you think that all of the libraries in the queue have shown that
there is ample community interest?

-- 
Michael Caisse
Ciere Consulting
ciere.com