17 Oct
2007
17 Oct
'07
12:51 a.m.
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. -- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting http://www.boost-consulting.com