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
