Re: Proposal: "Newly Endorsed Libraries" section in release notes

Peter Dimov via Boost <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.comp.lib.boost.devel
Message-ID <[email protected]>
Andrey Semashev wrote:
> On March 10, 2026 2:47:28 PM Peter Dimov via Boost
> <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> 
> > Andrey Semashev wrote:
> >> To be frank, I never fully understood the point of endorsement.
> >
> > The point of endorsement was to prevent libraries that weren't ready
> > for formal review to have such scheduled and thereby waste everyone's
> > time.
> 
> I don't remember there being an influx of underprepared libraries. IIRC,
> endorsements were an attempt to prevent review periods with no submitted
> reviews. We didn't have those for a while, but we still did have review periods
> with little reviews, so I'm not sure how successful that attempt was.
> 
> Anyway, as I said, there are many ways to express interest in the library and a
> (non-binding) intention to review it. It's the formality of the act of
> endorsement and what it entails for the one who endorses is what I don't like
> or understand.

The formality was because the review wizard wasn't allowed to unilaterally
decide to not schedule a review for a library, once such was requested.


_______________________________________________
Boost mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
https://lists.boost.org/mailman3/lists/boost.lists.boost.org/
Archived at: https://lists.boost.org/archives/list/[email protected]/message/2KUDITFR6QBFWKUBOZVIQJLGI7UPPGJD/
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.