1364 mantis issues

From: Shalom.Bresticker@freescale.com
Date: Sun May 01 2005 - 14:18:30 PDT

  • Next message: Shalom.Bresticker@freescale.com: "1364-2005 intro, index"

    (Does anyone know why they call it Mantis? Maybe because a Mantis is a
    bug?)

    I looked over some of the recent 1364 entries in the Mantis database.
    I have a few comments on some of them.

    1. Mantis issue 669 is the Particpant List for the Introduction to the
    P1364-2005 document. Just as a matter of courtesy, the 1364 participants
    should be aware of it.

    Also,
    "ames Markevitch" should be "James Markevitch".
    Mac is called "Michael" in the BTF list and "Mike" in the ETF list.
    Mr. Sutherland is called "Stu" in the ETF list and "Stuart" in the BTF list.

    Regarding "The following members of the entity balloting committee voted
    on this standard," I thought only the entity names were to be listed, and
    not the names of the Designated Representatives also, but I am not sure
    about that.

    "Sumburst Design" should be "Sunburst Design".

    2. Mantis 661 is labelled "consistent error/warning", but the Description
    talks about "Notes", which is Mantis 658, not about error and warning.

    3. Mantis 658 is the Notes issue.

    I did not yet look over the 18-page proposal in detail, but in general,
    what is most important is that normative content should not be lablled
    a Note. I don't think it is really forbidden to say "Note that ...".
    You don't have to put every clarifying comment as a NOTE. NOTEs are really
    intended for things like the example in 13.2.1.1 "Tool implementers may find
    it convenient to provide a command line argument...", which is really outside
    the scope of the standard.

    One example in the proposal which I do not like did catch my eye by chance.
    In 27.25 (2nd para), the proposal changes

    "Note that the $fopen system function can also return fd file descriptors
    (indicated by the msb being set)"

    to

    "The $fopen system function may also return fd file descriptors
    (indicated by the msb being set)"

    I do not like this because the word "may" makes it sound like a feature which
    it is optional to implement, which is not the case.

    4. Mantis 687 is the compatibility pragma.

    This issue is in the 'assigned' state.
    I don't remember what we said in the last meeting.
    Should this be in the 'resolved' state?
    It was passed at the April 7 meeting.

    5. Mantis 688: $timeskew

    The Description references ballot comment #12, but that 12 appears as a link
    to Mantis issue 12, which is wrong.

    The Additional Information field says, "Awaiting full proposal from Shalom"
    and points in ETF 659, which are both wrong.

    The final motion listed, described as "Same changes re: remain active flag
    as in $timeskew" should say "Same changes re: remain active flag in $fullskew
    as in $timeskew".

    The final bug note should say "is now Mantis issue 705" instead of "is not".

    ==

    Please send call-in info for Monday's conference call.

    Thanks,
    Shalom 

    -- 
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 : Sun May 01 2005 - 13:54:51 PDT and
    sponsored by Boyd Technology, Inc.