Library submissions will consist of a group of files of source code, documentation, examples, tests and perhaps others. This code can be delivered one or more ways:
These file formats have been the traditional manner to deliver a group of files. One or both of these methods must be supported by the system. At a minimum, libraries should be available in at least one of these formats.
Reviews are essential to library deployment.
When searching the web for code libraries, dozens or in some cases hundreds of candidate libraries will be found. Even after eliminating those that don't meet basic requirements of license, documentation, tests, etc, there will likely remain a large number of candidates to evaluate. This evaluation can take considerable time. User will typically read reviews for the different candidate libraries and pick the one with the least negative feedback for a more thorough personal evaluation.
Boost libraries are subjected to a more formal and rigorous review process. Participants in this process submit their reviews to a review manager in a short time frame - one or two weeks. This works well. But while the short time frame focuses the disicussion, not everyone can allocate the time required in the particular review period. So we require a system whereby reviewers can submit their reviews in advance of the official review period. If the library gets submitted and reviewed by Boost, the review manager will have a head start on reviews. It also helps library authors to get feedback before the formal review process.