[review][beast] Beast Review Results

Previous Topic Next Topic
 
classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
3 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

[review][beast] Beast Review Results

Boost - Users mailing list
In an effort to get you all to just read this announcement sequentially,
I will start with the result:

        Beast is ACCEPTED into Boost without conditions

The entire community is served when the Boost review process works well
and I would like to personally thank each of you who took your valuable
time and worked to make Boost better. We had 21 formal reviews submitted
from a demographic that included both seasoned participants and
first-time reviewers. It is gratifying to have such participation for
what some might see as a niche library.

  * Thank you Vinnie for your effort to assemble a high-quality package
    for review and for your responsiveness on the mail-lists. GitHub,
    and Slack.
  * Thank you to the individuals that submitted their first Boost
    review.
  * Thank you to the veteran contributors and authors for continuing to
    devote energy to the community.

I found the discussion surrounding the library beneficial and I know
that Vinnie walked away with actionable items to improve Beast.

--------------------
The Stats:
--------------------

While the review process is not exactly tallying up votes and casting a
verdict, we can gain some insight of the general, gross-scale opinion of
the library.

Official reviews were received from:

   Reviewer               Accept | Reject
------------------------------------------
 * Zach Laine           :   X
 * Nik Bougalis         :   X
 * Artyom Beilis        :            X
 * Peter Dimov          :   X
 * Klemens Morgenstern  :   X
 * Glen Fernades        :   X
 * Marcel Ebmer         :   X
 * Scott Determan       :   X
 * Stanislav Karchebnyy :   X
 * Michael Larson       :   X
 * Vadim Zeitlin        :   X
 * Jared Wyles          :   X
 * Niall Douglas        :   X
 * Barrett Adair        :   X
 * Gyorgy Szekely       :   X
 * Daniela Engert       :   X
 * Jens Weller          :   X
 * Phil Endecott        :            X
 * Bjorn Reese          :            X
 * Rüdiger Berlich      :   X
 * Christopher Kohlhoff :   X



Most of the reviewers agreed on the inclusion of Beast into Boost and at
the same time that Beast isn't a great name for the library. (Just say
Boost.Beast 10-times-fast). Vinnie has a FAQ item discussing the name
and his continuing use is deliberate. He has heard the petitions to
change and weighed them.


--------------------
Concerns:
--------------------

A variety of concerns and comments were made during the review. An
impressive number of items were addressed in code or documentation
during the review period itself.

Some of the stated concern for rejection included:

* Too many templates
* Run-time polymorphism / OO would be better.

* Library scope is too small and provides no real value to users -

  This is clearly one of those value judgements and for some users the
  not-in-scope nature of Beast made the feature set not compelling
  enough to use or have as a Boost library. Other users spent time
  converting existing projects to use Beast. This included projects
  previously running POCO, libcurl, and homegrown solutions.

  Beast has existing commercial and open-source users. The library
  clearly meets the needs of some users.

* Premature optimization
* Security concerns

* Poor support for HTTP chunking -

  Vinnie proposed and then later made changes addressing the chunking
  concerns. Unfortunately, the reviewer with the complaint did not
  respond to multiple requests for feedback.

* Licensing -

  Four files have dual licenses (BSL and another). Boost's legal
  counsel is reviewing the situation and we hope to have guidance by
  the end of this week. I have not placed a condition on the
  acceptance of Beast based on the legal feedback because Vinnie knows
  licensing issues must be remedied before the repository is merged
  into Boost.

--------------------
The Upsides:
--------------------

There were lots of great things said about the Beast package. Some of
these include:

* Great documentation
* High quality implementation.
* Thorough test suites
* Already being used by commercial entities and others
* Lots of successful real-life conversions of existing clients/servers
* Extremely responsive developer (do you sleep Vinnie?)


--------------------
An Author as much as a Library:
--------------------

Accepting a library into Boost is also accepting an author. Boost
authors have enormous latitude in the control and modifications of their
libraries. Vinnie has shown dedication to addressing issues, listening
to constructive input, making changes when appropriate, and protecting
his vision of what the Beast is. I believe Vinnie will serve the
community well as a contributor.


--------------------
Final Thoughts:
--------------------

Reviews are hard. It is hard to have your work torn apart and remain
considerate. It is hard to repeat answers to previously asked questions.
It is hard to explain specific use-cases and why it is important a
library supports them. It is difficult to critique a large body of work.
It is hard to stick with conversations to make overall improvements.

I was impressed with the participants in the review. We are all
opinionated and passionate -- likely a prerequisite to being part of the
Boost community. Thank you all for making Boost better.

I'm looking forward to seeing additional libraries and application built
with Beast.


--
Michael Caisse
Ciere Consulting
ciere.com
_______________________________________________
Boost-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: [review][beast] Beast Review Results

Boost - Users mailing list


On July 20, 2017 3:57:33 AM EDT, Michael Caisse via Boost-users <[hidden email]> wrote:
>In an effort to get you all to just read this announcement
>sequentially,
>I will start with the result:
>
> Beast is ACCEPTED into Boost without conditions

I'm sure I probably missed a memo early on stating *what beast is*. However, how about even a brief synopsis or summary to lead reports such as this for our edification?

Thanks!

>The entire community is served when the Boost review process works well
>and I would like to personally thank each of you who took your valuable
>time and worked to make Boost better. We had 21 formal reviews
>submitted
>from a demographic that included both seasoned participants and
>first-time reviewers. It is gratifying to have such participation for
>what some might see as a niche library.
>
>  * Thank you Vinnie for your effort to assemble a high-quality package
>    for review and for your responsiveness on the mail-lists. GitHub,
>    and Slack.
>  * Thank you to the individuals that submitted their first Boost
>    review.
>  * Thank you to the veteran contributors and authors for continuing to
>    devote energy to the community.
>
>I found the discussion surrounding the library beneficial and I know
>that Vinnie walked away with actionable items to improve Beast.
>
>--------------------
>The Stats:
>--------------------
>
>While the review process is not exactly tallying up votes and casting a
>verdict, we can gain some insight of the general, gross-scale opinion
>of
>the library.
>
>Official reviews were received from:
>
>   Reviewer               Accept | Reject
>------------------------------------------
> * Zach Laine           :   X
> * Nik Bougalis         :   X
> * Artyom Beilis        :            X
> * Peter Dimov          :   X
> * Klemens Morgenstern  :   X
> * Glen Fernades        :   X
> * Marcel Ebmer         :   X
> * Scott Determan       :   X
> * Stanislav Karchebnyy :   X
> * Michael Larson       :   X
> * Vadim Zeitlin        :   X
> * Jared Wyles          :   X
> * Niall Douglas        :   X
> * Barrett Adair        :   X
> * Gyorgy Szekely       :   X
> * Daniela Engert       :   X
> * Jens Weller          :   X
> * Phil Endecott        :            X
> * Bjorn Reese          :            X
> * Rüdiger Berlich      :   X
> * Christopher Kohlhoff :   X
>
>
>
>Most of the reviewers agreed on the inclusion of Beast into Boost and
>at
>the same time that Beast isn't a great name for the library. (Just say
>Boost.Beast 10-times-fast). Vinnie has a FAQ item discussing the name
>and his continuing use is deliberate. He has heard the petitions to
>change and weighed them.
>
>
>--------------------
>Concerns:
>--------------------
>
>A variety of concerns and comments were made during the review. An
>impressive number of items were addressed in code or documentation
>during the review period itself.
>
>Some of the stated concern for rejection included:
>
>* Too many templates
>* Run-time polymorphism / OO would be better.
>
>* Library scope is too small and provides no real value to users -
>
>  This is clearly one of those value judgements and for some users the
>  not-in-scope nature of Beast made the feature set not compelling
>  enough to use or have as a Boost library. Other users spent time
>  converting existing projects to use Beast. This included projects
>  previously running POCO, libcurl, and homegrown solutions.
>
>  Beast has existing commercial and open-source users. The library
>  clearly meets the needs of some users.
>
>* Premature optimization
>* Security concerns
>
>* Poor support for HTTP chunking -
>
>  Vinnie proposed and then later made changes addressing the chunking
>  concerns. Unfortunately, the reviewer with the complaint did not
>  respond to multiple requests for feedback.
>
>* Licensing -
>
>  Four files have dual licenses (BSL and another). Boost's legal
>  counsel is reviewing the situation and we hope to have guidance by
>  the end of this week. I have not placed a condition on the
>  acceptance of Beast based on the legal feedback because Vinnie knows
>  licensing issues must be remedied before the repository is merged
>  into Boost.
>
>--------------------
>The Upsides:
>--------------------
>
>There were lots of great things said about the Beast package. Some of
>these include:
>
>* Great documentation
>* High quality implementation.
>* Thorough test suites
>* Already being used by commercial entities and others
>* Lots of successful real-life conversions of existing clients/servers
>* Extremely responsive developer (do you sleep Vinnie?)
>
>
>--------------------
>An Author as much as a Library:
>--------------------
>
>Accepting a library into Boost is also accepting an author. Boost
>authors have enormous latitude in the control and modifications of
>their
>libraries. Vinnie has shown dedication to addressing issues, listening
>to constructive input, making changes when appropriate, and protecting
>his vision of what the Beast is. I believe Vinnie will serve the
>community well as a contributor.
>
>
>--------------------
>Final Thoughts:
>--------------------
>
>Reviews are hard. It is hard to have your work torn apart and remain
>considerate. It is hard to repeat answers to previously asked
>questions.
>It is hard to explain specific use-cases and why it is important a
>library supports them. It is difficult to critique a large body of
>work.
>It is hard to stick with conversations to make overall improvements.
>
>I was impressed with the participants in the review. We are all
>opinionated and passionate -- likely a prerequisite to being part of
>the
>Boost community. Thank you all for making Boost better.
>
>I'm looking forward to seeing additional libraries and application
>built
>with Beast.
>
>
>--
>Michael Caisse
>Ciere Consulting
>ciere.com
>_______________________________________________
>Boost-users mailing list
>[hidden email]
>https://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost-users

--
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
_______________________________________________
Boost-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: [review][beast] Beast Review Results

Boost - Users mailing list
In reply to this post by Boost - Users mailing list
On 7/20/17 00:56, Michael Caisse via Boost wrote:
> In an effort to get you all to just read this announcement sequentially,
> I will start with the result:
>
> Beast is ACCEPTED into Boost without conditions
>

<snip some words>

Seems like the table was difficult to read with non-monospaced fonts. I
should have kept with the accept/reject words. I apologize for not
thinking about that. Here is a more legible version.

>
> --------------------
> The Stats:
> --------------------
>
> While the review process is not exactly tallying up votes and casting a
> verdict, we can gain some insight of the general, gross-scale opinion of
> the library.
>
> Official reviews were received from:
>

-- Library Accepted By --

 Zach Laine
 Nik Bougalis
 Peter Dimov
 Klemens Morgenstern
 Glen Fernades
 Marcel Ebmer
 Scott Determan
 Stanislav Karchebnyy
 Michael Larson
 Vadim Zeitlin
 Jared Wyles
 Niall Douglas
 Barrett Adair
 Gyorgy Szekely
 Daniela Engert
 Jens Weller
 Rüdiger Berlich
 Christopher Kohlhoff


-- Library Rejected By --

 Artyom Beilis
 Phil Endecott
 Bjorn Reese



--
Michael Caisse
Ciere Consulting
ciere.com
_______________________________________________
Boost-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost-users
Loading...