On Mon, Oct 22, 2018, 00:09 Robert Ramey via Boost
On 10/21/18 11:33 AM, Antony Polukhin via Boost wrote:
On Sun, Oct 21, 2018, 18:51 Robert Ramey via Boost
<...>
Right, I'm sure that boost would be willing to review any such libraries when they are submitted.
I'm proposing to relax the review requirements for those libraries. Include them even if the Boost feedback was "need more work". Simplify the review process. We should give users and library authors a simple way to meet and interact. Boost is a perfect platform for establishing existing practice and ensuring library quality. Let's not loose it because of the exhausting review process that requires a lot of time and scares of some of the authors. If the library accepted into C++ or Library Fundamentals - then it was already reviewed. Another idea: how about dropping the "review manager" requirement? Allow library author to manage the review and require a separate manager only if the votes for library inclusion are doubtful or there's less than N votes.