From: "Jeff Garland" <jeff@crystalclearsoftware.com>
Our review wizard, Tom B. has suggested to me that we allow subsequent reviews to begin even if a previous review has been extended. This means 2 or more reviews will possibly be running in parallel. I don't believe we have a written policy, but I'm quite certain we have never run reviews in parallel. I also think it is a very bad idea. I believe reviews will suffer because people that want to review all the libraries in progress and participate in the discussion will not have enough time to do so. For most of us boost is a part-time thing -- we only have so much time per week to participate...
This leads me to the conclusion that the current review schedule needs to be redone. 1st because IOStreams has been extended and 2nd because we agree that the current schedule is too aggressive. See
I'm glad the IOStreams Library review was extended. I'm still working on mine. There's no way I'd have time for yet another review simultaneous with this one. I'd have to ignore one or the other. Therefore, I quite agree with your conclusions. -- Rob Stewart stewart@sig.com Software Engineer http://www.sig.com Susquehanna International Group, LLP using std::disclaimer;