On Friday, 9 August 2013 at 00:53:18 UTC, Tyler Jameson Little
wrote:
I havn't seen anything in this mailing list (except the above
and one by Walter Bright) for a while, and I haven't seen any
pull requests for any of the items in the review queue.
I haven't come back to std.serialize since the reformed review
process has been established. I was hoping someone would be
willing to run a Formal Review on the review process so that any
ambiguity or disagreements could be worked out. Instead I went
and played around a bit:
https://github.com/opticron/ProtocolBuffer
http://he-the-great.livejournal.com/46498.html
I'm by no means the only authority in starting a review (there is
no review wizard). Just need an active member to take up the
task, where active is not specifically defined.
As for the current state of std.serialization. Jacob has the docs
sorted out with the exception of no sidebar entry:
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/18386187/docs/std.serialization/index.html
I wanted to look over the code with an eye for the new review
requirements, and also running -cov against the unittests (Jacob
reported 88% where I think 80% is library acceptable)
So please, if someone is willing to take std.serialize or even
another item from the review queue, do so. I will be happy to
assist, jesse.k.phillip...@gmail.com It isn't very hard or even
that time consuming. (One of the reasons I've put off starting
std.serialize is because I want to dig in and provide a review
for the code and haven't become interested again since the review
process distraction)
---------------
On a related note, I don't think std.serialize is a replacement
for std.json, instead std.serialize would be built on std.json
like it is for std.xml (at this time json is not available
output).
