On 2015-08-27 09:23, Darren Cook wrote:
... And because I do not have unlimited time on my hand, I simply cannot invest the time to find fundamental flaws. This is an incredible important point. If the documentation does not allow us to *easily* understand the design and use cases it should be rejected. Because it may be bad, we just cannot tell.
Have now followed a couple of reviews, it seems any largish library needs more than one team member, with different skills. Niall's last message is basically saying he wants a boost review not to rubber-stamp the library for acceptance, but to get some feedback. I.e. to use the boost brain power as a temporary team. And I would be totally fine with that if that intention was explicit, i.e. stop the official review, ask for feedback.