Peter Dimov wrote:
Eric Niebler wrote:
Peter Dimov wrote:
Why do we need a review manager at all?
Primarily to avoid any questions or doubts about whether a library should be accepted or not. The review manager supposedly takes everybody's feedback into account, but makes the ultimate yes/no decision, and is even free to buck popular opinion.
Do so many of our reviews end in such a non-conclusive manner as to require a decision from a review manager?
It's irrelevant that it doesn't happen often. If it happens EVER and we don't have one person designated to break the tie, there's the potential for a nasty situation. And that one person has to be qualified for his/her opinion to carry weight. You might say, "Well, if it's so close a call, we should just reject the library," but that doesn't help. It just moves the line. The question then becomes "Was there enough debate to bring the result into question?" If you don't have an adjudicator, you have no way to settle these disputes. -- Eric Niebler Boost Consulting www.boost-consulting.com