Brad and Steven, Your points that the committees already have plenty to do is exactly my point on why NOW is the time to merge the documents. Right now, the editor (whether me or someone else) has very little editing to do, and can dedicate substantial time to merging the two LRMs. Three months from now, the editor will be busy making corrections to multiple documents, and will no longer have the time to merge the standards. And, as every past major release of 1364, SV 3.x and 1800 have shown, the editors work will only intensify as the standard progresses. Worse, if the merging work gets slowed down because the editor has to in parallel maintain drafts of the unmerged documents, there is a high risk that changes specified 1364 and 1800 unmerged documents will be overlooked in a parallel, work-in-progress effort to merge the two LRMs. If, on the other hand, the two separate LRMs are made perfect first (as if that will ever happen) and then the merging is done at the end, there will be a 6 month period of time when all committee work must be frozen, so that the two old LRMs are not being changed while they are being merged. Thank you for showing how important it is to do the merging early in the next revision process. Stu ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Stuart Sutherland stuart@sutherland-hdl.com +1-503-692-0898 > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-sv-ac@eda.org [mailto:owner-sv-ac@eda.org] On > Behalf Of Brad Pierce > Sent: Monday, January 30, 2006 11:55 AM > To: sv-bc@eda.org; sv-ac@eda.org; sv-ec@eda.org > Subject: [sv-ac] Re: [sv-bc] Opinion on merging of P1364 and P1800 > > There are still plenty of errata in the P1364 standard to > keep us busy, > too. > > For example, regarding signing > > http://www.eda.org/sv-bc/hm/2731.html > > and configs -- > > http://www.boyd.com/1364_btf/report/full_pr/107.html > http://www.boyd.com/1364_btf/report/full_pr/108.html > http://www.boyd.com/1364_btf/report/full_pr/175.html > http://www.boyd.com/1364_btf/report/full_pr/212.html > http://www.boyd.com/1364_btf/report/full_pr/248.html > http://www.boyd.com/1364_btf/report/full_pr/372.html > http://www.boyd.com/1364_btf/report/full_pr/501.html > http://www.boyd.com/1364_btf/report/full_pr/514.html > > -- Brad > > -----Original Message----- > From: Steven Sharp [mailto:sharp@cadence.com] > Sent: Monday, January 30, 2006 11:43 AM > To: sv-bc@eda.org; sv-ac@eda.org; sv-ec@eda.org; > Brad.Pierce@synopsys.COM > Subject: Re: [sv-ec] Re: [sv-bc] Opinion on merging of P1364 and P1800 > > > >From: "Brad Pierce" <Brad.Pierce@synopsys.com> > > >It's a question of priorities, opportunity cost, return on > investment, > >and resource constraints. > > And this is true even if we ignore the "real job" issues that Brad > raised. Even within the standardization effort there are priorities. > > The current 1800 standard contains a large number of errata that need > to be fixed. Until the worst of these are addressed, this is > much more > urgent than the merging of standards. > > Steven Sharp > sharp@cadence.com > > >Received on Tue Jan 31 08:48:06 2006
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Tue Jan 31 2006 - 08:48:31 PST