Managing the review queue

[spir]

On 03/28/2011 10:32 PM, Jonas Drewsen wrote:
> On 28/03/11 21.19, Walter Bright wrote:
>> On 3/28/2011 12:18 PM, dsimcha wrote:
>>> == Quote from Walter Bright (newshound2 at digitalmars.com)'s article
>>>> A further issue with the review process is that the bulk of people
>>>> won't look at
>>>> something until it is actually released. I think the only way to deal
>>>> with this
>>>> is to be willing to correct deficiencies found after release.
>>>
>>> Please clarify "release". If you mean making the code and
>>> documentation public
>>> and conveniently accessible, that's the point of the review process.
>>> If you mean
>>> actually including it with the DMD distribution, then maybe we need an
>>> "incubator"
>>> package as others have suggested. Things would get in incubator after
>>> abbreviated
>>> review. While in incubator we'd make no guarantees about their
>>> stability or even
>>> their continued inclusion. The "real" review would take place over a
>>> release
>>> cycle or two, while the module was in incubator. After each release
>>> cycle, we'd
>>> make a three-way decision. A module can:
>>>
>>> 1. Be declared stable and promoted to std.
>>>
>>> 2. Be declared not worthwhile and removed.
>>>
>>> 3. Kept in incubator pending further review and improvements.
>>
>> I have thought in the past about putting such modules into another
>> package, call it "foo" for lack of a better name, and put it in the dmd
>> distribution. If the package pans out in real life, then move it to std.
>> So, yes, I think your idea is a good one.
>
> Please do! I would love to put in the libcurl wrapper in for early feedback.
> Libcurl supports many other protocols that just HTTP, and it would be very nice
> to try out the wrapper design initially by implementing HTTP only support.
> Based on the feedback of that the rest of the protocols could be implemented.

This idea seems to find large support very fast...

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