Review of std.signal

[Dicebot]

On Thursday, 23 January 2014 at 16:17:38 UTC, Martin Nowak wrote:
> On 01/06/2014 11:39 AM, Dicebot wrote:
>> =/ Any good idea to make those more visible? Maybe we should 
>> setup a
>> mailing list for those who want to be notified about ongoing 
>> reviews?
>
> Yes, a separate newsgroup would help here.
> Do you have an idea for a name?
> digitalmars.D.phobos or digitalmars.D.review

digitalmars.D.review is better. We only review Phobos module that 
way now but it can be extended.

Related offtopic:

I wonder sometimes if it can/should be generalized for any 
important decision making involving community. Currently only 
Phobos reviews live with their own somewhat independent life, 
everything else is process bottleneck mandating some intervention 
from small core team. Probably investing into some tooling here 
can result in a great benefit.