"Jeff Garland" <jeff@crystalclearsoftware.com> writes:
On Sat, 28 Aug 2004 10:00:38 -0700, tom brinkman wrote
Tom --
A couple thoughts.
1) The review schedule is too aggressive. One week per review with no breaks is going to kill us and not give enough time for complete reviews. 1.5 weeks with .5 weeks in-between is more doable.
Absolutely. Or a little bit longer. 2 weeks was common in the past. If someone's on holiday one week it gives them another week to do a library review.
This also gives some buffer for review run-overs. The current week is a reasonable exception because we have 2 libraries that overlap the same area.
2) We might need a break to finish the release, so hopefully there is some flexibility in the schedule.
3) I'm guessing boost::geometry2d isn't really under development...
4) These periodic reports are great -- keep up the good work!
Hear, hear! -- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting http://www.boost-consulting.com