Re: [Boost-users] [boost] tweaking the review process

Subject: Re: [Boost-users] [boost] tweaking the review process
From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2008-12-20 02:46:35

on Fri Dec 19 2008, Fabio Fracassi <f.fracassi-AT-gmx.net> wrote:

> David Abrahams schrieb:
>> on Wed Dec 17 2008, Fabio Fracassi <f.fracassi-AT-gmx.net> wrote:
>>
>>> David Abrahams schrieb:
>>>> on Mon Dec 15 2008, John Phillips <phillips-AT-mps.ohio-state.edu> wrote:
>>> [...]
>>>>>   I don't know if I was the first to do this, but I have done it. Looking at the
>>>>> current contents of the instructions to review managers, either they have changed
>>>>> since I started managing reviews or I somehow hallucinated extra words to add the
>>> user
>>>>> list to the lists that should receive an announcement of the review.
>>>> An announcement is one thing; instructing people to post their reviews
>>>> in the same list is a different thing entirely.
>>>>
>>> You don't have to, it happens almost automatically if you are not
>>> careful.  Many people write their Review as a reply to the original
>>> announcement, and if you are not extra careful to remove the user list
>>> from the recipients your review gets send to both lists.
>>
>> The poster of the announcement should make it clear how to post a
>> review.  I never liked the idea of reviews showing up in the list with
>> the subject "Review period for Boost.XXXX begins today" anyway.  Also
>> s/he can set the Reply-To: field.
>>
>
> When using thunderbird as a client to the gmane news gateway the Reply to fields don't
> seem to work though.
> I don't know if there is a technical solution to this particular
> problem.

I've never had a problem with Gnus' Reply-to functionality and gmane.
It's hard to imagine that TBird is broken in this way.

> Beside this I agree with you, if the original anouncement clearly states that reviews
> and followups should go to .devel.
> Still I think that sometimes some messages might go astray and maybe we should suggest
> that the review manager and/or the submitter should have an eye on the users list, so
> that nothing is lost. (and maybe forward those strays to .devel)

Not a bad suggestion.

-- 
Dave Abrahams
BoostPro Computing
http://www.boostpro.com