Paul A Bristow wrote:
Andy Little wrote:
Three positive reviews is not sufficient in my opinion. However, the precedent has already be set, as other libraries have been approved on a similar limited number of reviews.
I think this low number is because people feel they MUST put quite a lot of work into a review.
Provided reviewers state when they only glanced at the submission, I think that the sum of all these 'quickies' would be helpful, when considered in combination with a few 'in-depth' reviews.
I'm one of those people who feels I must put a lot of work into a review. For the FSM review I broke this policy and wrote a review even though I had only studied the documentation. My review was negative; it was basically a list of what I considered to be shortcomings of the library. I ended up getting into an unpleasant exchange with the library author, who repeatedly challenged me to suggest concrete changes to the design to fix the perceived problems. I had examined the library more thoroughly, my guess is that I would have been able to suggest improvements. I don't blame the library author in this case; it's only natural to ask for an alternate design when you are told that your design is flawed; however, I simply didn't have sufficient time to devote to the library. In the end, my "quicky" review wasn't quick at all, since I ended up writing a long sequence of messages. As a result, I don't plan to submit reviews in the future unless I have time to study the submissions thoroughly. Jonathan