Review schedule info is duplicated

[joaquintides]

It can be found here:

• https://www.boost.org/review/past/
• https://www.boost.org/review/upcoming/

and here:

• https://www.boost.org/doc/formal-reviews/review-results.html

Plus, the info is out of sync between the two places (and not updated in either).

[rbbeeston]

So which one should be the source of truth?

[gregjkal]

Those first two are managed in the database (we still need tweaks, which will be handled by #1728). I would prefer we keep those rather than having to make docs changes to update the schedule.

[mborland]

Since I manage the schedule how would I add something to the database? Personally I like the consolidated review-results page

[gregjkal]

You would be able to edit them in the admin panel. It's actually already there but needs some small improvements to make it more usable.

I'm definitely on board with consolidating into one view!

[mborland]

You would be able to edit them in the admin panel. It's actually already there but needs some small improvements to make it more usable.

That feels like overkill for something that is currently on a doc page; I shouldn't need admin rights to edit one page. Once an item is moved from upcoming to past it should never needs to be edited again.

I'm definitely on board with consolidating into one view!

I do like how the current page is formatted. It's very similar to the old one which has worked well.

[joaquintides]

FWIW I think relying on doc editing is better than having the data stored in a DB. What does the DB gain us here?

[gregjkal]

I shouldn't need admin rights to edit one page

Django's built-in admin permissions are very granular. Easy to give you permission to edit just one data type (reviews).

What does the DB gain us here?

The main thing it does is make reviews data instead of just text. This allows us to associate it with other data like users, libraries, and Boost versions (e.g. we could link to a library's associated reviews from the library detail page). Could allow filtering and searching (there are >200 of them), automated email notifications on new reviews. It also allows instant updates - I don't know what the process is for updating the docs version, but this would require submitting a form.

[mborland]

It also allows instant updates - I don't know what the process is for updating the docs version, but this would require submitting a form.

On the old website I had write access so I would open a PR with changes, and then merge it myself.

[gregjkal]

That sounds like what @PeterTurcan does in this repo.

[PeterTurcan]

Greg, I prepared the content of this page: https://www.boost.org/doc/formal-reviews/review-results.html after an issue was filed my way. If this is the way to go then this page should be manually updated for each new library review and then for each Boost release. I don't know enough about what was planned for a database approach to know what it might offer and what the update process and cadence would be. Either way I lean towards keeping things simple!

…

On Tue, May 27, 2025 at 12:05 PM Greg Kaleka ***@***.***> wrote: *GregKaleka* left a comment (boostorg/website-v2-docs#455) <#455 (comment)> That sounds like what @PeterTurcan <https://github.com/PeterTurcan> does in this repo. — Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#455 (comment)>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AEIBS2JEGKM2P4T5Q4OOXU33ASZP7AVCNFSM6AAAAAB5ZBSNASVHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHMZDSMJTGY2DGNBUGU> . You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID: ***@***.***>

[rbbeeston]

I would think this is about a wash in terms of time. Is there any added value to having it in a DB for current or future use?

[gregjkal]

Rob, see my comment above. The biggest potential benefit is linking to other data. Simplest example of that is avatars that link to GitHub profiles. We could do more in the future.

[rbbeeston]

Makes sense to me. On the whole we should encourage development that better includes the community, both in interaction and Recognition. @PeterTurcan and @mborland are you ok with that?

[mborland]

As long as I get the requisite access to keep doing what I was doing I'm OK with whatever you guys decide