Re: [sv-ec] Mantis backlog and 10/15 meeting

Jonathan, as one of the main protagonists in the name
resolution space, I would endorse a moratorium on name
resolution issues during the regular meetings.

However, it is also imperative to have a good process
for coming to consensus on the name resolution issues.
If those issues are not addressed to a large extent
for the 2008 LRM, there is going to be serious divergence.
At one point, there was a mail alias that was being used
but the engagement from critical participants was so
low as to render that process useless.  As a result the
process moved more directly into the committee process.
That, I agree, is a poor forum for such issues.

There is a meeting planned for next Monday to discuss
name resolution issues.  I'm going to clearly re-iterate
Mentor's position in a post this morning; I hope that
the other vendors will take clear positions so that
on Monday we can figure out how to proceed.

Gord.



Jonathan Bromley wrote:
> hi EC,
> 
> Albeit with some trepidation, I need to express my concern
> about the rate of progress we're making through the considerable
> backlog of issues that remains outstanding.
> 
> The name resolution and (closely related) inline-constraint issues
> are undoubtedly of the very greatest importance, but telephone 
> discussion in regular EC meetings continues to be unproductive;
> the issues are complex and not easily expressed verbally, and 
> difficult conflicts remain to be resolved between the protagonists.
> Meanwhile there is a backlog of other, much less controversial
> items that are of direct practical importance to users and
> need to be fixed before the 1800-2008 cutoff.
> 
> I, for one, would be prepared to find a non-trivial amount of 
> my own time to work on some of those outstanding items, preparing
> proposals where none exist and tidying-up existing proposals
> where necessary, if I felt confident that EC could address
> them in a focused and timely way by email vote and then a very
> tightly structured meeting to pick off the stragglers.  To make
> this work, we'd need a complete moratorium on telephone discussion
> of the name resolution and related issues until the competent
> protagonists (amongst whom I certainly don't count myself) can
> reach some kind of consensus, or at least can clearly and 
> definitively present us with two conflicting proposals and 
> an understanding of their respective consequences.
> 
> I have a vested interest to declare here.  The current round 
> of SV language changes is the last one that will have any 
> effect on my daily work before the end of my career.  Right
> now I see only the prospect of unfinished business stretching
> into the far future.  Our user community deserves better.

-- 
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Gordon Vreugdenhil                                503-685-0808
Model Technology (Mentor Graphics)                gordonv@model.com


-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.