🚀 go-pugleaf

andrew@calvin.dgbt.doc.ca (Andrew Patrick) writes:

>>    The percentage of submissions that do not get resubmitted is too high.

>Agreed.  As of last count 14/41 (34%) of the submission had been
>reviewed and changes had been recommended, but the authors had not
>submitted a new version.  The reasons behind this are not known.
>Perhaps people are not interested in producing the best software they
>can.  I don't believe that the reviews we have been returning have been
>unreasonable, but others who have been through the review process
>should answer this question.

I guess I can respond to this one.  I submitted my malloc debugging library
to c.s.r last november and I can say that I came very close to not 
completing the task myself.  In fact, nowadays, I just post my stuff to
alt.sources because it is easer. 

My submission went as follows:

	11/25 		submitted to c.s.r
	11/25,26	problems reported with the shar mechanism that I had
			used which caused some lines which were ".." to loose
			one of the "."s and some embedded control chars in
			the manual page.
	11/27		request from c.s.r for resubmission with the package
			put together with the "correct" shar file and a 
			uuencoded version of the library
	~12/1		library resubmitted (11/27 was thanksgiving holiday
			weekend)
	12/30		reviews back requests for changes, additional
			documentation, changes to the config procedure 
	12/31		re-submitted
	 1/25		reviews back, more requests for changes.
	~2/1		re-submitted
	 3/25		I asked what was up with the library
	 3/26		c.s.r reported that there were still some problems, but
			he was going to post it as is.
	 3/31		library posted.

During the time frame 11/25 - 3/31, the library did change substantially, 
but that was due to the constructive comments of the people whom I had
distributed the library to via email, not from the reviews performed by
c.s.r.  

Also note that on 3/31 (the posting date) the code was already
out of date by approx 2 months.  

>submitters are serious about their software, we are usually able to
>complete a couple of rounds of reviews and get things posted within a
>few months.

I think that is way too much time and too many reviews.  I think the 
community would be much better served by a much faster and much less 
nit-picky mechanism that precluded a reviewer from being able to say
things like, "I don't like the way he did that".    

-- 
*** SENTINEL(tm) The ultimate Debugging Environment - email for more info ***

Conor P. Cahill              (703)430-9247            cpcahil@virtech.vti.com
Virtual Technologies, Inc.  46030 Manekin Plaza          Dulles, VA 21066