David Abrahams wrote:
on Sun Oct 14 2007, "Sean Huang" <huangsean-AT-hotmail.com> wrote:
Specifically, my questions are: 1. Do changes in this magnitude warrant a mini-review? 2. Is it a good idea that the new implementation be reviewed by other boost threading experts such as Peter and/or Howard? Take it to the next level, does it make sense to have a peer review process for at least significant changes?
It's a good idea, but I don't think we should mandate it. The autonomy of library developers to make improvements has always been a core Boost policy, and taking that away could significantly dampen the sense of ownership (and thus enthusiasm) of library authors.
I agree with Dave. The thread library (and some other Boost libs) are also a bit special in that they are becoming (or already have become) part of the C++ standard library. That is subjecting them to a whole additional level of peer review, including an upcoming public review period. --Beman