Re: 1364 Ballot Comment Review meeting

From: Shalom.Bresticker@freescale.com
Date: Fri Apr 01 2005 - 00:39:20 PST

  • Next message: Fitzpatrick, Tom: "Reminder: 1364 Ballot Comment Review meeting"

    1. Because the schedule is so pressured, why should we wait with the more
    difficult items till April 7? (Though I don't see that the SV committees are
    going to be able to address all the committees in the short time allotted,
    nor Stu able to implement them all.)

    2. Since the IEEE requires addressing all the comments, the "priority"
    classification is less important. Priority here does not mean that you
    can avoid addressing lower priority items because of some deadline that
    you have arbitrarily imposed on yourself. You have to address all. A resolution
    cannot be, I think, "I decided arbitrarily that I want to finish all
    responses by April 12, so I will not deal with what I will not get to by
    that date." On the other hand, I think you can say, "This particular issue
    would take months to resolve and it is not important enough, so we propose
    not to fix it now." Where is the difference? For example, in an issue which
    is not the most important, but also not the most difficult to fix.

    3. What to do about an issue where on the one hand, a majority will be in
    favor of changing it, but on the other hand, it is likely to cause at least
    one positive vote to change to a negative vote? I have a specific issue in mind.

    Thanks,
    Shalom

    On Thu, 31 Mar 2005, Neil Korpusik wrote:

    > Hi Shalom,
    >
    > The "quiet period" has ended. All of the committees are now free to
    > openly discuss all of the issues that have been assigned to them.
    >
    > The hope is that many of the easy issues can be addressed in either
    > a one-time 2-hour teleconference call or during the first two hours
    > of the up-coming face to face meeting. It has been suggested that it
    > would be best if a 2-hour teleconference call can be held before the
    > April 7th f2f meeting to specifically focus on the easy items. This
    > will allow updates to be made to the LRM in parallel with further
    > work on the more difficult items.
    >
    > Items flagged as high-priority should be addressed before the
    > others. Items coming from the negative votes are more urgent
    > than those from the positive votes. All high priority items (from
    > either negative or positive votes) are to be considered before
    > the medium priority items.
    >
    > This is my current understanding of the process based on input from
    > the champions and from Johny.
    >
    >
    > Neil
    >
    >
    >
    > Shalom.Bresticker@freescale.com wrote:
    > > Tom,
    > >
    > > The published schedule requires completing the changes by April 12.
    > >
    > > Given that April 7 is over a week from now, I don't see why we could not
    > > start discussing them by email already.
    > >
    > > Shalom
    > >
    > >
    > > On Tue, 29 Mar 2005, Fitzpatrick, Tom wrote:
    > >
    > >
    > >>Hi All,
    > >>
    > >>With the ballot comments received, and the Champions group having done a
    > >>first pass at categorizing the issues, we would like to hold a joint
    > >>BTF/ETF meeting to try and resolve the outstanding issues from the 1364
    > >>ballot. To that end, we will be meeting on Thursday, April 7, at
    > >>noon-5pm EDT (note that clocks "spring forward" on Sunday), 9am-2pm PDT.
    > >>The San Jose contingent can attend in person at Sun (directions to
    > >>follow), while the Massachusetts contingent can attend in person at
    > >>Cadence (directions also to follow). If neither location is convenient,
    > >>there will also be a dial-in number available.
    > >>
    > >>Please RSVP to Neil and myself and let us know if you'll be attending in
    > >>person or by phone. We have a little more cleanup to do on the issues
    > >>list, but I will distribute it in the next day or so. I will only be
    > >>distributing it to folks who RSVP to this invitation. Our goal is to
    > >>come to conclusion on as many of the issues as possible, and for those
    > >>which we can't close, to assign owner(s) to resolve them, before the
    > >>4/18 P1800 meeting, if possible.
    > >>
    > >>Thanks to Neil Korpusik and Victor Berman for arranging the bicoastal
    > >>facilities we'll be using for this meeting.
    > >>
    > >>Thanks,
    > >>-Tom
    > >>
    > >>Tom Fitzpatrick
    > >>Verification Technologist
    > >>Mentor Graphics Corporation
    > >> <mailto:tfitz@model.com> tfitz@model.com
    > >>W: (978)448-8797
    > >>C: (978)337-7641
    > >>
    > >>
    > >>
    > >
    > >
    >
    > 

    -- 
Shalom.Bresticker @freescale.com                     Tel: +972 9  9522268
Freescale Semiconductor Israel, Ltd.                 Fax: +972 9  9522890
POB 2208, Herzlia 46120, ISRAEL                     Cell: +972 50 5441478
  
[ ]Freescale Internal Use Only      [ ]Freescale Confidential Proprietary

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Fri Apr 01 2005 - 00:17:55 PST and
    sponsored by Boyd Technology, Inc.