On 1/13/2011 2:20 PM, Phil Endecott wrote:
vicente.botet wrote:
IMO, one of the author's role is to look for a review manager
I'd just like to insert a small note of caution, that the review manager needs to be somewhat neutral about the library being reviewed. Having the library author choose their review manager makes it more likely that they will select someone who is predisposed in their favour. Ideally we would have multiple candidates for each post and the wizards would choose someone based on their domain expertise. In the absence of a queue of suitable candidates, of course it's fine for the library author to encourage people - but I would prefer for that to happen in public.
Phil.
In general, the Review Wizards discuss Manager candidates. On some occasions we have decided a potential Manager was not a good choice at that time. We discuss whether we think the potential manager has the technical skills to understand the issues in the review (The Manager does not need to be an expert in the field of the library, but does need to understand issues as they come up in the review.), and whether the manager is a good choice for providing a fair and active review period and evaluation. In specific, on the couple of instances where a conflict of interest seemed possible, there was an off line discussion with the potential Manager. We also encourage authors to beat the bushes for potential Managers, and we encourage interested parties to volunteer, but we view part of our role as quality control on the Manager selection, and we take that seriously. John