On 3/20/17 2:56 PM, Niall Douglas via Boost wrote:
Back on topic, I think that the current process of getting a library into the review queue is a bit outdated. I suggest we make use of > existing infrastructure and make a Github repository "review" owned by the Review Wizard in which submissions occur by way of the endorsing Boost member creating an issue with the description of the library.
The problem with this is that we don't want one member endorsing a library for review. We want *lots*.
Almost without doubt when potential review managers scan the list of review pending libraries, they will prioritise those libraries with the most public endorsements.
How would they know which libraries have the most endorsements?
I had been thinking that an extra column in the table at http://www.boost.org/community/review_schedule.html would be entitled "Seconded by" and in the cell would be the names of all those who endorsed that library for review. In other words, if you Peter ask for endorsements for review here for your new library SharedPtr2 or something, and say Edward, myself, Robert, Beman and Michael all publicly say "this library looks very likely to pass a review", all our names appear in that column.
Does this make sense now?
LOL - not to me. If I really studied it it might. But right now I'm in TMP/constexpr hell and my brain is already overloaded.
I would not recommend a "click to star" type system for endorsing a library for review. Endorsing a library for review publicly with your name is a solemn statement that you have given a cursory check of the library and that you publicly declare you think it has some chance of passing a review.
I have no opposition to a *separate* "click to star" upvoting system so people can easily upvote some review as being more urgent than others.
Niall
The whole thing seems pretty complex to me. I'm not sure who is going to administer/script such a thing. FYI the incubator has the facility for interested parties to submit a review along with star ratings. The idea was that a library would get officially considered only once some number of reviews indicated interest. Problem is/was - very few reviews were submitted. So I'm a little skeptical that anything more elaborate than that is going to be successful. Robert Ramey