On Wed, Jan 25, 2023 at 1:21 PM Mateusz Loskot via Boost
There review submission is not an one chance in lifetime attempt. ... So, I wouldn't use words like disservice and failure
I disagree. Writing a review is a significant investment of effort and we need all the reviews we can get. It wastes reviewers' time when they have to review the same library twice. I think everyone would agree that when someone re-reviews a library it will not quite live up to the same level of energy and thoughtfulness as the original review. Some reviewers will not bother with a second review (this happens every time, re-reviews get less engagement). "You never get a second chance to make a first impression." We set prospective libraries up for success when we take time ahead of the review for subject matter experts, stakeholders, and volunteers who are interested in improving Boost, to "pre-review" the library and help the author address any likely hiccups before the formal review. To "incubate" it if you will (h/t Robert). But the sort of incubation which more resembles a short period of focused revision guided by experts, immediately preceding the review date. Thanks