Subject: Re: [boost] Draft copy - Call for Submissions - CMake for Boost
From: Robert Ramey (ramey_at_[hidden])
Date: 2018-10-19 05:12:32
On 10/18/18 9:13 PM, Gavin Lambert via Boost wrote:
> On 19/10/2018 13:51, Robert Ramey wrote:
>> On 10/18/18 5:40 PM, Andrey Semashev wrote:
>>> A quick reply to this particular part. I'm opposed to this anonymity
>>> protocol and think that submitters should be *required* to come
>>> forward and actively participate in the review.
>> Of course.Â But is it necessary that they identify themselves with
>> their real names?
> Is it necessary to refuse to allow them to do so?Â This is how it is
> presently worded.
> And, if a submission is accepted, presumably anonymity would be revoked
> and the submitter would face "the Boost review process" anyway,
Hmmm - I was envisioning that only the author would be revealed after
the submission was selected via the review process.
> so I'm not sure what purpose is served by trying to encourage submissions from
> people who (in your own words) find that process distressing, annoying
> and/or unpleasant.
As I've said, I'm wondering if it might convince someone who would
otherwise not submit to submit after all. I think there are people who
would be intimidated by the "competitive/winner take all" nature of the
process. And I think there are others who feel that Boost is "an
insider's game" so it's not worth participating.
At the very least, I'm thinking it's something interesting to talk about
and perhaps consider.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk