Re: [boost] [signals2][review] signals2 review results

> I would like to make some suggestion to improve the review management:

<valid points snipped>

Whilst I understand your points, unlike our day job, people do have other 
more pressing commitments and, for many, the extensive effort given to 
reviewing boost libraries is time given in an ad-hoc manner.

Whilst it is good to have the timetable and a specific method for submitting 
reviews, I don't think we need to go further and be more regimented. The 
existing flexibility is a positive part of the process, IMHO.

[ I do have problems with some libraries actually getting to the point of 
review before interest, maturity of interface or implementation are right, 
but that doesn't apply here and has been covered in previous discussions.]

I'm grateful to all who devoted time to this library and I think Stjepan was 
flexible and handled the review very well.

Paul