Re: [boost] [Boost-users] Review wizard's report for October 2007
On Sep 15, 2007, at 5:04 PM, Tobias Schwinger wrote:
Ronald Garcia wrote:
Exception --------- :Author: Emil Dotchevski
:Review Manager: Need Volunteer
I'm, interested. As my time is limited right now, I'd need some for proper pre-review inspection, though.
Thank you for volunteering. Could you give me a sense of how much time you would need before you could schedule a review?
Libraries under development ===========================
Please let us know of any libraries you are currently developing that you intend to submit for review.
The Boost X-files vol. 1, a collection of various utilities.
It contains some function objects, such as a brute-force solution to the forwarding problem (to be factored out of Fusion) and generic factories. Further, and most notably, it includes three thread-safe Singleton templates with an easy-to-use, "Boost-style" interface.
It's almost in review-ready state, so given the number of entries we can probably put it in the queue right now.
Thanks for the information. I will add X-Files to the review queue. I would like to list the three libraries (factory, singleton, and forward) as separate reviews. I think that this would make sense for the purpose of reviewing. Let me know if there is some reason to review all three simultaneously. ron
Hi Ron, Ronald Garcia wrote:
On Sep 15, 2007, at 5:04 PM, Tobias Schwinger wrote:
Ronald Garcia wrote:
Exception --------- :Author: Emil Dotchevski
:Review Manager: Need Volunteer
I'm, interested. As my time is limited right now, I'd need some for proper pre-review inspection, though.
Thank you for volunteering. Could you give me a sense of how much time you would need before you could schedule a review?
A few days, worst case.
Libraries under development ===========================
Please let us know of any libraries you are currently developing that you intend to submit for review. The Boost X-files vol. 1, a collection of various utilities.
It contains some function objects, such as a brute-force solution to the forwarding problem (to be factored out of Fusion) and generic factories. Further, and most notably, it includes three thread-safe Singleton templates with an easy-to-use, "Boost-style" interface.
It's almost in review-ready state, so given the number of entries we can probably put it in the queue right now.
Thanks for the information. I will add X-Files to the review queue. I would like to list the three libraries (factory, singleton, and forward) as separate reviews. I think that this would make sense for the purpose of reviewing. Let me know if there is some reason to review all three simultaneously.
Well, it's (what I call) a "non-intrusive attempt to make the Boost review process scale better". And actually it's X-files vol.1 as I had hoped others to join in - but there hasn't been much response, yet :-P. I still think it's a good idea, however, because it seems (from developer comments) the formal overhead often gets in the way of applying useful factorizations. Further it's rather disproportional to spend a whole week reviewing a tiny utility while having just a few weeks for a large, framework-style submission. For more "meta talk" on the issue see the introductory post http://tinyurl.com/3cjlqd . So here's a concrete analysis for X-files vol.1: 1. Forward and Factory are related things, rather trivial and so tiny that even a Fast-Track review would be way over-sized, 2. Singleton probably provides enough of an interface for a Fast-Track, but 3. we should probably save review managers as they seem to be a rare resource, these days :-). => Seems one full review should be more than sufficient. Regards, Tobias
Hi Ron, Ronald Garcia wrote:
On Sep 15, 2007, at 5:04 PM, Tobias Schwinger wrote:
Ronald Garcia wrote:
Exception --------- :Author: Emil Dotchevski
:Review Manager: Need Volunteer
I'm, interested. As my time is limited right now, I'd need some for proper pre-review inspection, though.
Thank you for volunteering. Could you give me a sense of how much time you would need before you could schedule a review?
A few days, worst case.
Libraries under development ===========================
Please let us know of any libraries you are currently developing that you intend to submit for review. The Boost X-files vol. 1, a collection of various utilities.
It contains some function objects, such as a brute-force solution to the forwarding problem (to be factored out of Fusion) and generic factories. Further, and most notably, it includes three thread-safe Singleton templates with an easy-to-use, "Boost-style" interface.
It's almost in review-ready state, so given the number of entries we can probably put it in the queue right now.
Thanks for the information. I will add X-Files to the review queue. I would like to list the three libraries (factory, singleton, and forward) as separate reviews. I think that this would make sense for the purpose of reviewing. Let me know if there is some reason to review all three simultaneously.
Well, it's (what I call) a "non-intrusive attempt to make the Boost review process scale better". And actually it's X-files vol.1 as I had hoped others to join in - but there hasn't been much response, yet :-P. I still think it's a good idea, however, because it seems (from developer comments) the formal overhead often gets in the way of applying useful factorizations. Further it's rather disproportional to spend a whole week reviewing a tiny utility while having just a few weeks for a large, framework-style submission. For more "meta talk" on the issue see the introductory post http://tinyurl.com/3cjlqd . So here's a concrete analysis for X-files vol.1: 1. Forward and Factory are related things, rather trivial and so tiny that even a Fast-Track review would be way over-sized, 2. Singleton probably provides enough of an interface for a Fast-Track, but 3. we should probably save review managers as they seem to be a rare resource, these days :-). => Seems one full review should be more than sufficient. Regards, Tobias
participants (2)
-
Ronald Garcia -
Tobias Schwinger