Eric Niebler wrote:
Peter Dimov wrote:
It is not irrelevant at all. If disputes only occur one time in a hundred, there is no need to recruit 100 volunteer review managers just because one of them might need to break a tie. We can just say "Eric Niebler breaks ties if they occur" and carry on.
That's a terrible system! I'd rather you do it. :-) I would have been a very bad person to break a tie in the ASIO review, for instance. I know very little about network programming. The idea is that the tie-breaker person for any review should have some domain knowledge and can make an informed decision, should it be necessary. There is no one person qualified to break ties in every possible domain.
The idea is that the knowledge needs to come from the reviewers, not from the tie-breaker person. Anybody qualified and willing to act as a review manager will obviously be qualified and willing to write a review, but the converse is - as we are observing - not necessarily true. If the review process does not produce a sufficiently solid case for acceptance, the library is rejected. It is the responsibility of the submitter to present his/her case citing reviews as supporting material such that the busy tie-breaker person/group is able to make a quick decision.