Boost logo

Boost :

Subject: Re: [boost] [review queue] Proposed new policy to enter the review queue
From: Niall Douglas (s_sourceforge_at_[hidden])
Date: 2017-03-17 12:51:10

>> The above proposed policy effectively pushes the bottleneck higher up
>> the chain, but I think that's no bad thing. Library authors, myself
>> included, like to build cathedrals irrespective of whether anyone will
>> ever use them nor appreciate them. Currently it's too easy to build a
>> library nobody will ever use and get it into the review queue where it
>> will languish for many years because no review manager will touch it.
>> That part needs to change.
> I like the idea. Of course, regarding the endorsements, you now have to
> define who qualifies as "Boost member". Is it anyone who signed up for
> boost-dev mailing list?

I guess it probably is. We've not had problems with people gaming the
review process to get a library in no matter what by flooding the review
process with fake positive reviews. So I guess anyone on boost-dev is fine.

> Another, similar suggestion. When we were planing for review with Robert,
> we were already aware of two people having informally committed to
> submitting a review. I liked the idea a lot. Maybe it can be formalized.
> One of the criteria for review-readiness could be to have at least N (where
> N = 2 or similar) people who declare that they would submit a review. This
> declaration is not binding.

Great idea, and I think that that would be the case in practice anyway.

> This prevents the situations where a review ends in the rejection due to
> lack of reviewers. I am not sure if it is the same as endorsement.

Ok, I've asked boost-steering for feedback on this policy change. If
they approve, I'll do up a beta of the Boost website for people to
check, and if all okay it'll go live.

The boost-steering policy change discussion request can be found at
for those interested.


ned Productions Limited Consulting

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