From: Tobias Schwinger (tschwinger_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-06-10 13:51:15
Andy Little wrote:
>
> "Tobias Schwinger" <tschwinger_at_[hidden]> wrote in message
> news:d8c7s8$9kj$1_at_sea.gmane.org...
>
>> The library has been updated and the following changes have been made:
>
>
> A Plea from the ex - typeof review manager.
>
> IMO It should be a cast iron rule that no changes to the library
> implementation or documentation can be made during the review period.
> Note that the formal-review process document states this informally, but
> I think that should should be changed to Will and If a library author
> wants to supply bug fixes , they should be should be made available as
> separate versions of the library. IOW the version that is reviewed is
> the oriiginal one.
Well, it's not up to me to change the rules. But I added an archive with the
previous version with an '_previous' suffix (to avoid further confusion) to the
sandbox.
>
> Heres the quote.
> "A proposed library should remain stable during the review period; it
> will just confuse and irritate reviewers if there are numerous changes.
> It is, however, useful to upload fixes for serious bugs right away,
> particularly those which prevent reviewers from fully evaluating the
> library. Post a notice of such fixes on the mailing list."
>
> FWIW I had a tentative review of the library lined up, but now ...
> which version should I be reviewing ? (e.g. I too was disappointed at
> the lack of examples. Apparently this is now fixed etc , etc).
>
> IOW changing a library during its review period means a lot of effort on
> the part of the reviewer, which most of us simply dont have time to make.
>
I'ld say, review the version you downloaded when starting. Only update, if you
have enough time and want to, or if something stops you from "fully evaluating
the library".
Thanks,
Tobias