31 May
2005
31 May
'05
10:30 p.m.
"Rob Stewart" wrote:
There were 3 reviews, all in favour of accepting the library.
While I'm not questioning the value of accepting this library specifically, doesn't it seem less than ideal to accept a library that -- for whatever reasons -- garnered only three reviews?
While the library was truly peer reviewed, and the reviews were by knowledgeable folk, the base of input is narrow as a result. Should this be the norm?
Low number of reviewers is nothing unusual - I have seen it in previous reviews. What helped to attract more people was extended review period (in case of FSM/Statecharts). /Pavel