sob., 5 wrz 2026 o 18:39 Robert Ramey via Boost <boost@lists.boost.org> napisał(a):
On 9/4/26 8:42 AM, Robert Beeston via Boost wrote:
Would it be acceptable to just bring in an new review manager to assess the already submitted reviews, rather than start from scratch?
Rob
On Fri, Sep 4, 2026 at 8:18 AM Glen Fernandes via Boost < boost@lists.boost.org> wrote:
Vinnie Falco wrote:
It is starting to look like the Capy and Corosio review outcome is not going to materialize.
What are our options at this point?
A brand new formal review is always an option.
Glen _______________________________________________
Why not to both? New formal review which would accept new reviews and add them to the set of current ones.
One of the problems with the formal review process has been the two week window for accepting reviews. Not everyone who might review can fit into a specific time window. The boost library incubator was an attempt to remedy this but was not successful.
It is true that two weeks is too short a time. On the other hand, if one has an infinite amount of time and gets relaxed, one will do a review even less likely. Regardless of the result, Capy/Corosio authors received a bunch of feedback. The first step would be to incorporate all of it (but not necessarily apply every suggestion). I think that one of the reasons for the diminishing numbers of reviews, even if not the most important one, is that all the easy/small libraries got accepted. Now we are left with big ones, requiring a lot of specialist knowledge. One way to mitigate this, is to have super clear and super polished documentation, so that some questions need not be asked and some confusion need not arise. Regards, &rzej;