Subject: Re: [boost] [poly_collection] Two remarks
From: Robert Ramey (ramey_at_[hidden])
Date: 2017-05-10 15:05:02
On 5/10/17 1:36 AM, Paul A. Bristow via Boost wrote:
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Boost [mailto:boost-bounces_at_[hidden]] On Behalf Of Ion Gaztañaga via Boost
>> Sent: 09 May 2017 14:24
>> To: boost_at_[hidden]
>> Cc: Ion Gaztañaga
>> Subject: Re: [boost] [poly_collection] Two remarks
>> Thanks Dominique,
>> We'll take your comments to the review summary as improvement notes.
> IMO Dominique and Pete Bartlett's comments/notes are both well-informed and should count as reviews with a clear 'yes'.
> The review form specifically asks "How much do you know about the subject?" to provide guidance to the review manager on how much
> weight to attach to the review.
> The review managers decision should not be a simple vote, counting 'Yes' and 'No' to get a result, but a nuanced assessment of the
> various comments taking account of the expertise of the reviewer.
> So everyone should make a review, however slightly informed they are. Even a totally uninformed "I didn't understand what this
> library is supposed to do, or how I should use it" review is useful because it suggests that the documentation is poor.
> It's also useful to know that people are using the library, even if they don't have a clue how it works.
> So I'd encourage everyone not to be shy and to answer *all* the review questions, especially the 'how much do you know' and most
> important including the final 'yes/no' question.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk