aedis is ACCEPTED into boost with conditions
Boost.aedis is ACCEPTED with conditions. Accept: 3 ( + 1 late one) Conditional: 1 Reject: 4 All but one rejections asked for changes that were not fundamental to the design, but rather were about particular implementation details or high-level API design issues. Thus I conclude, based on the reviews, that there is no need for another mini-review. This is also based on Marcelo's engagement, so I am confident that many issues will be addressed in the future . These are the conditions - name it boost.redis - clearly document/specify the behaviour of async_exec, async_receive & async_run, how they interact and all the edge cases (and unit test them) - unit tests for error handling, especially for pipes. - add a design discussion & FAQ page. That should mostly copy & paste from the review discussions. - from_bulk & to_bulk should either us tag_invoke or be be renamed to aedis_from_bulk or aedis_to_bulk - remove memory_resource usage and optimize the allocation strategy of a request object (using new/delete), so that it ideally allocates once and then reuses the memory Please note that the inclusion into boost does not mean that it has to be shipped with the next release. I also strongly recommend development of typed commands, possibly with code generation. This is however not a condition and does not need to be in the first release that's included in boost. Another recommendation is to add some very basic explanation of redis, as some users will read your doc before they look into redis. I want to thank everyone who submitted reviews, especially Ruben who really drilled down on some details and brought in his experience from MySQL. Thank you Zach for getting the discussion started on type-safe command access; based on the discussions I am confident that some feature like that will be added on top of the existing APIs. Similarly I want to thank Дмитрий, Sam & Alan, who's review helped me to formulate the conditions. I am also grateful for (who I think are) first time reviewers, Mohammed Nejati, Robert Leahy, Sam Hartsfield & Miguel, and of course our boost veterans Vinnie & Christian. Likewise I want to thank Marcelo for all his responses to reviews and questions and of course for all the work that went into developing aedis. Congratulations Marcelo!
On Fri, 27 Jan 2023 at 13:11, Klemens Morgenstern via Boost
Boost.aedis is ACCEPTED with conditions.
Congratulations, Marcelo. Should you have any questions during the Boost-ification process, please let me know, as I've recently gone through it and have it fresh.
On Fri, Jan 27, 2023 at 4:22 AM Ruben Perez via Boost
Boost.aedis is ACCEPTED with conditions.
Congrats Marcelo!
Should you have any questions during the Boost-ification process, please let me know, as I've recently gone through it and have it fresh.
That is very kind, thanks :) Regards
On Fri, Jan 27, 2023 at 4:11 AM Klemens Morgenstern via Boost
- name it boost.redis
I hardly think that's fair. Aedis is perfectly fine and leaves the field clear for additional Redis-adjacent things. And the library is Marcelo's creation, shouldn't he get to choose the name? Regards
On Fri, Jan 27, 2023 at 7:38 AM Vinnie Falco wrote:
On Fri, Jan 27, 2023 at 4:11 AM Klemens Morgenstern via Boost
wrote: - name it boost.redis
I hardly think that's fair. Aedis is perfectly fine and leaves the field clear for additional Redis-adjacent things. And the library is Marcelo's creation, shouldn't he get to choose the name?
Anyone is free to contest the review manager's decision (including the acceptance) by raising an issue with the review wizard(s). CC. Mateusz Glen
On Fri, Jan 27, 2023 at 7:43 AM Glen Fernandes wrote:
On Fri, Jan 27, 2023 at 7:38 AM Vinnie Falco wrote:
I hardly think that's fair. Aedis is perfectly fine and leaves the field clear for additional Redis-adjacent things. And the library is Marcelo's creation, shouldn't he get to choose the name?
Anyone is free to contest the review manager's decision (including the acceptance) by raising an issue with the review wizard(s). CC. Mateusz
(For which the outcome can only be nothing changes or the whole review result is voided).
On Fri, 27 Jan 2023 at 13:11, Klemens Morgenstern via Boost
Boost.aedis is ACCEPTED with conditions.
Accept: 3 ( + 1 late one) Conditional: 1 Reject: 4
All but one rejections asked for changes that were not fundamental to the design, but rather were about particular implementation details or high-level API design issues. Thus I conclude, based on the reviews, that there is no need for another mini-review. This is also based on Marcelo's engagement, so I am confident that many issues will be addressed in the future .
I would like to thank everybody that participated in the review in one way or another and more specifically * Klemens for offering to be the review manager. * All the people that submitted a review. Both of these roles are very time consuming and in fact many spent days reviewing Aedis. I can only be thankful to them. Suggested changes that are not part of the conditions for acceptance won't be neglected. I will revisit the discussion and implement them if meaningful. Regards, Marcelo
participants (5)
-
Glen Fernandes
-
Klemens Morgenstern
-
Marcelo Zimbres Silva
-
Ruben Perez
-
Vinnie Falco