"Doug Gregor" <dgregor@cs.indiana.edu> wrote in message news:7DEAB5E4-DFD3-11D8-BD44-000D932B7224@cs.indiana.edu... | | On Jul 27, 2004, at 6:42 AM, Thorsten Ottosen wrote: | > contribution will fit into the overall scheme. Then a formal | > mini-review should follow. | | At what point are there enough algorithms under the same category that | we should just call it a "full" review? Good question! I don't gave an definite answer. I would prefer that the main contribution is organized by a few people; this main contribution should then be given a full review. And then extra small contributions are mini-reviewed. Take the string-algorithms as an example. I hope Pavol will encourage people to add extra functions and work out their interface with him and others on the list. I don't see the first real review happening without some group with the main responsibility. And I don't see very small contributions happening on their own because I fear the big picture is lost. br Thorsten