-----Original Message----- From: boost-bounces@lists.boost.org [mailto:boost-bounces@lists.boost.org] On Behalf Of Jonathan Turkanis I'm one of those people who feels I must put a lot of work into a review. For the FSM review I broke this policy and wrote a review even though I had only studied the documentation. My review was negative; it was basically a
of what I considered to be shortcomings of the library.
I ended up getting into an unpleasant exchange with the library author, who repeatedly challenged me to suggest concrete changes to the design to fix the perceived problems. I had examined the library more thoroughly, my guess is that I would have been able to suggest improvements. I don't blame the
list library
author in this case; it's only natural to ask for an alternate design when you are told that your design is flawed; however, I simply didn't have sufficient time to devote to the library. [Brian Braatz Writes:]
What are the expectations here? I find myself in this spot frequently. I see something up for review, and it ALWAYS happens at the worst time for me. I look at it, but I tend to not say much unless I can REALLY devote the time needed to give the library the proper amount of review time. There might be "no answer" to the expectations questions. But I would be curious how others feel about this. I.e. If I only have an hour or two to look at something- is it still useful for me to submit a review? Part of the problem I have is an enormous respect for what a boost library is. It is not something one slaps together just to get their name in lights (to me at least). A boost library makes you go "Wow". if it doesn't make you go "Wow" it doesn't belong in boost. But if I cannot devote the time needed to review something DEEPLY, I feel it is somewhat disrespectful for me to participate. Do you guys think I am wrong to feel this way? Or do you find the opinions of a quick review valuable? Brian