From: Andrzej Krzemienski (akrzemi1_at_[hidden])
Date: 2020-10-05 17:21:36
pon., 5 paÅº 2020 o 19:12 Mateusz Loskot via Boost <boost_at_[hidden]>
> On Mon, 5 Oct 2020 at 18:55, Robert Ramey via Boost
> <boost_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> > On 10/5/20 3:28 AM, Pranam Lashkari via Boost wrote:
> > > On a related note, I know that these reviews and the review summary are
> > >> stored "permanently" "somewhere". I would like to see our boost
> > >> page include a pointer to these chains of posts. Ready access to this
> > >> "historical" data would be very helpful to me as a potential user
> when I
> > >> evaluate competing solutions to a problem that I might be having.
> > >>
> > >
> > > As Mateusz pointed we have some pointers on the review page.
> > >
> > > : https://www.boost.org/community/review_schedule.html
> > This is not enough for me.
> > I want links to the email chains on the news feed.
> TBH, I can't see it feasible to maintain lists of posts/threads.
> I see dates in the table.
> I go to https://lists.boost.org/Archives/boost/2020/09/
> I find relevant period/month and I get list of threads/links
> in neat chronological form presented:
> The only issue is to ask reviewers to use good subjects, e.g.
> [library][review] My Review
> > I also want link to the review results / commentary.
> Link to review results announcement is there,
> click to it and access the follow-up posts.
As an alternative to all this, one could expect a library author to compile
a summary of the issues and controversies brought during the review (at
least the most interesting/relevant ones) and put it in the docs under
section "Design Discussion". But I am not sure if this would be polite to
actually expect that from the authors. They are already putting enormous
effort and offer their free time to design and document the library, and
undergo the difficult process of Boost Review. Some libraries do that,
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk