Decision on container design

[spir]

On 02/01/2011 05:00 PM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
> Regarding the general issue that someone makes an informal proposal (either
> here, as a DIP, or on the Phobos mailing list), followed by a thundering
> silence: I believe that a good technique is to formalize the proposal review
> process, which has been a homerun for Boost. The disadvantage of that is that
> almost without exception this is very taxing to library submitters. This means
> the submitter must put a lot of thought and a lot of work into motivating,
> polishing, and documenting an artifact without any guarantee that it would lead
> to inclusion in the target library. I've seen very, VERY elaborate Boost
> submissions fail - literally months of work gone to waste.

An alternative, or a complementary approach, may be to delegate part of your 
responsability. In this case, I'm thinking at a pool of people which "mission" 
would be to obviously show interest (or lack of) for proposals made on the 
mailing list --whatever their advancement, formality, code quality... This 
would provide a valuable indicator while removing some load from your 
shoulders, I guess. Such people may be chosen by cooptation.
Note this approach is not exclusive of formal & heavy adoption process like 
Boost's; instead it can be a complementary or preliminary way of judging 
interest for proposals.

A similar principle may indeed be used for other purpose: specification & 
evolution of D-the-language, implementation & bug removal of the reference 
compiler,...

Denis
-- 
_________________
vita es estrany
spir.wikidot.com