Re: [sv-ec]E-mail Vote: Closes 12am PST December 15 2007

I am going to defer my votes until after the WG meeting so that
I know if we'll be meeting Monday.


On 1858 there is included a vote mark on the original:
    1858-randomize-constraint-resolution.htm
proposal.  But that hasn't been there for some time as there
was no consensus on that and that proposal is not in alignment
with the other two.

In terms of what a vote means on 1858, I am assuming that we can
vote "yes" on both and that it would then mean that we would
have to just merge them (at that point even the champions could
just direct us to do that).


Also, echoing Shalom's comments, 1809 should not be part of
our ballot here -- that is on the BC ballot.  So as a point
of order, I would like to see 1809 removed from the ballot
here so that there is no confusion.  This is particularly
important since what BC is voting on currently is NOT the
proposal attached to the Mantis item.


Gord.




Mehdi Mohtashemi wrote:
> We are conducting an email vote based on December 10 2007 sv-ec meeting.
> The time period for this ballot is 3 days, the voting closes on December
> 15 2007, 12 am. Please send your vote no later than Friday 
> December 14 2007 11:59pm PST]
> Please read guidelines and instructions for each mantis item listed
> since
> there may vary depending on the mantis item.  A few mantis items
> may have multiple proposals, you should vote for each proposal
> with YES/NO vote.  
> 
> Individual eligible members' email is used in TO list since there
> maybe a delay with sv-ec email reflector. Other regular attendees
> as well as sv-ec alias are listed in the CC part.  At the moment the
> reflector site does not come up.
> 
> The following mantis items are listed for voting:
>   section a) Mantis set related to queue manipulation, covered by 1702 
>      (Note 1702 was approved on December 10 2007) to be closed.
>      412, 516, 517, 518, 519, 520, 521, 522, 801, 1809 
> 
>   section b) 
>       958, 1447,
>      1858 [contains more than one proposal]
>      2055, 2137, 2181 2227
> 
>  Operating guidelines for sv-ec email vote:
>  - Only 3 days to respond (Midnight Friday December 14th 2007)
>  - An issue and its proposal passes if there are zero ** NO ** votes 
>    and at least half of the eligible voters respond with a YES vote.
>  - Any NO vote must be accompanied by a reason.
>    This issue will then be up for discussion at the next conference
> call.
>  - If there are more than one proposal indicated per mantis 
>    item, please cast your vote for each and every proposal.
>  - Please indicate any friendly amendment that you think will change
>    your vote to a YES, this will help with completing our task.
>   
>  As of the December 10 2007 meeting, the eligible voters are (total 15):
>  
>  Arturo Salz,
>  Cliff Cummings         
>  Dave Rich           
>  Francoise Martinolle
>  Neil Korpusik      
>  Ray Ryan
>  Gordon Vreugdenhil
>  Steven Sharp
>  Stu Sutherland
>  Heath Chambers
>  Don Mills
>  Mark Hartoog
>  Mike Mintz
>  David Scott     
>  Mike Burns
>  
>  
>  Please mark your vote below by an x. If No, then specify a reason. 
>  Send it to the reflector.
>     412, 516, 517, 518, 519, 520, 521, 522, 801, 1809 
> 
>  Section a) 
> CLOSE following mantis items, covered by 1702
>  412  ___ Yes   ___ No  
>  http://www.eda.org/svdb/bug_view_page.php?bug_id=000412        
> 
>  516  ___ Yes   ___ No     
>  http://www.eda.org/svdb/bug_view_page.php?bug_id=000516        
> 
>  517  ___ Yes   ___ No     
>  http://www.eda.org/svdb/bug_view_page.php?bug_id=000517        
> 
>  518  ___ Yes   ___ No     
>  http://www.eda.org/svdb/bug_view_page.php?bug_id=000518        
> 
>  518  ___ Yes   ___ No     
>  http://www.eda.org/svdb/bug_view_page.php?bug_id=000519        
> 
>  520  ___ Yes   ___ No     
>  http://www.eda.org/svdb/bug_view_page.php?bug_id=000520        
> 
>  521  ___ Yes   ___ No     
>  http://www.eda.org/svdb/bug_view_page.php?bug_id=000521        
> 
>  522  ___ Yes   ___ No     
>  http://www.eda.org/svdb/bug_view_page.php?bug_id=000522        
> 
>  801  ___ Yes   ___ No     
>  http://www.eda.org/svdb/bug_view_page.php?bug_id=000801        
> 
>  1809  ___ Yes   ___ No  
>  http://www.eda.org/svdb/bug_view_page.php?bug_id=0001809        
>  
> 
>   Section b)
>       958, 1447,
>      1858 [contains two proposals:
> 
>   (original proposal) 1858-randomize-constraint-resolution.htm	
>                       1858-randomize_with_syntax.htm]
> 	                1858_local.pdf
>      2055, 2137, 2181 2227 
> 
> 
>  958  ___ Yes   ___ No  
>  http://www.eda.org/svdb/bug_view_page.php?bug_id=000958        
> 
>  1447  ___ Yes   ___ No  
>  http://www.eda.org/svdb/bug_view_page.php?bug_id=0001447        
>  
>  1858  [Multiple proposal files] 
>   (original proposal) 
>   1858-randomize-constraint-resolution.htm    ___ Yes   ___ No 
>   1858-randomize_with_syntax.htm              ___ Yes   ___ No  
>   1858_local.pdf                              ___ Yes   ___ No     
>  http://www.eda.org/svdb/bug_view_page.php?bug_id=0001858        
>   
>  2055  ___ Yes   ___ No  
>  http://www.eda.org/svdb/bug_view_page.php?bug_id=0002055        
>  
>  2137  ___ Yes   ___ No  
>  http://www.eda.org/svdb/bug_view_page.php?bug_id=0002137        
>  
>  2181  ___ Yes   ___ No  
>  http://www.eda.org/svdb/bug_view_page.php?bug_id=0002181        
> 
>  2227  ___ Yes   ___ No  
>  http://www.eda.org/svdb/bug_view_page.php?bug_id=0002227        
>  
> 
> 
> section a) 
>      412 5.14.1 Queue operator examples use aggregate constructors
> incorrectly
>      522 use of concatenation in 5.14.2 (Francoise)
>      521 pattern assignment for queues (Francoise)
>      520 example of queues assignment (Francoise)
>      519 section 5.14,empty array literal syntax (Francoise)
>      518 queues and arrays (Francoise)
>      517 concatenation syntax usage section 5.14 (Francoise)
>      516 5.7 and 5.8 description of type compatible arrays
>      801 Errors in assignment pattern in 5.4 example
>     1809 forward references into $unit package
> 
> section  b)
>     1858 Name binding in inline constraints 
>          two separate proposals
>     1447 (detailed proposal, fixed up for D4).
>      958 dynamic array size method unclear when empty
>     2055 coverage bin distribution is not even
>     2137 Some assertion contexts should be procedural
>     2181 Ambiguity implicit declaration of production variables in
> randsequence 
> 

-- 
--------------------------------------------------------------------
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.