[sv-cc] Re: [P1800] Questions on our activities during the ballot period.

Hi Charles,

Here is a continuation of my previous note and to specifically answer your 
questions:

Technical committees focus will now shift as highest and only priority to 
resolution of ballot issues. As said below, I will forward these issues 
once I receive them from registered entities, and hopefully they will be 
sent much before the deadline. As for working on issues that would be part 
of the ballot (as indicated by the reporter), my take is to strictly 
follow the formal process of all ballot issues coming through the entity 
DR. If reporters know they have issues that are going to be part of the 
ballot, I would like to get that list directly from their DR. This way I 
also ensure that I don't get "conflicting" issues between different 
reporters in the same entity. I want to have a focal point (who is the DR) 
to formally compile and send the list. I would also urge reporters to 
focus their efforts on making sure all issues they have are properly 
documented and reported through the excel template by their DR ASAP.

Given the time frame we have, and assuming I will be getting ballot 
comments before the deadline, I think all technical committees will be 
very busy in ballot resolutions (maybe except for the next two weeks). As 
for what's going to happen next and regarding your questions on the next 
version, this discussion will be one of the main agenda items of the next 
WG meeting (April 19). In our last meeting it was agreed to postpone this 
discussion to next meeting (which is why you did not see a decision in the 
minutes), and after we have a good assessment on the LRM status in terms 
of ballot issues and readiness to revcom. I think waiting w/ this decision 
was right: all committees will have much work until then anyway, plus we 
will have more data.

In summary, I would like to reiterate that our main goal at this stage is 
"getting the LRM's ready for revcom" and we shall discuss and decide on 
what's next in our next WG meeting. 

Best Regards,

--- Johny.







Johny Srouji/Austin/IBM@IBMUS 
Sent by: owner-ieee1800@eda.org
02/23/2005 01:42 PM

To
chas@cadence.com
cc
IEEE1800 <ieee1800@eda.org>, owner-ieee1800@eda.org, SV-CC <sv-cc@eda.org>
Subject
Re: [P1800] Questions on our activities during the ballot period.







Hi Charles, 

I think you raise valid questions and I will reply to you later in the 
afternoon my time. 

In general, the process "spirit" is to enable timely and quality ballot 
resolution for the issues that will be raised during the ballot. Please 
note that in the ballot letters which were sent to registered entities, I 
have urged them to send me their ballot votes and issues as soon as they 
can, and if possible before 24 March. I would be forwarding ballot issues 
and working w/ Karen and the Champions group in filtering and forwarding 
ballot issues to the committees. Therefore, you probably need to start the 
work before April 6th. 

I will send you a detailed response and directions later in the afternoon. 


Thanks, 

--- Johny. 




Charles Dawson <chas@cadence.com> 
Sent by: owner-ieee1800@eda.org 
02/23/2005 12:22 PM 

Please respond to
chas


To
IEEE1800 <ieee1800@eda.org> 
cc
SV-CC <sv-cc@eda.org> 
Subject
[P1800] Questions on our activities during the ballot period.








Hi P1800 Committee,

The SV-CC Committee met today, and discussed Karen's email about our
current schedule.  We had a number of questions, which I was tasked to
ask you.  They are:

  - Can we work on stuff that the Reporter say that will show up on
    a ballot?

    It is assumed that the people reviewing the documents will end up
    filing (or having someone file for them) Mantis issues as they are
    found.  Presuming that the Reporter for these issues indicates that
    they intend to include it in their ballot, can we start working on
    them?  Some issues may take a while to resolve, and this would 
increase
    the likelihood of them being resolved within our timeline.

  - Can we continue to work on stuff that are targeted for the next
    version of the document?

    The email from Karen indicates that we cannot even DISCUSS items that
    are not targeted for this version of the document.  We thought this
    was a bit restrictive (in principle), even though we acknowledge that
    we are likely to be too busy reviewing the document ourselves to
    really work on further out stuff.

  - Timeline for beginning work on the next document?

    There was also a question as to when we can expect to begin working on
    items for the next document.  Do we have to wait for a new PAR?  If 
so,
    when would that happen?  If not, when can we expect to wrap up the
    current version and therefore start the next one?

  - Where in minutes does it say we are prohibited from further
    discussion/work on issues?

    We took an (admittedly) cursory look at the minutes from the P1800 
meeting,
    and could not find the text describing what was in Karen's email.  Can
    you clarify when this was discussed, and exactly what was decided at 
the
    P1800 meeting?

  - Can we close items that were resolved as part of the editing process?

    We have several items which were intentionally not addressed by the 
SV-CC
    committee because we knew that they would get resolved through the
    editing process.  Can we at least act on these items, since they will 
not
    require an actual change to the document?

The SV-CC Committee decided to meet again next Wednesday with the 
expectation
that you will have responded to our queries by then.  Without further 
direction
from you, it is likely that we will postpone our activities until the 
April 6th
meeting.

  -Chas

P.S.  I've included Karen's original email for reference.


-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Please Read: Schedule for responding to balloting feedback
Date: Fir, 18 Feb 2005 11:45:24 -0800
From: Karen Pieper <Karen.Pieper@synopsys.com>
To: srouji@us.ibm.com, <Karen.Pieper@synopsys.com>,
<matthew.r.maidment@intel.com>, Brad.Pierce@synopsys.com,
Mehdi.Mohtashemi@synopsys.com, <Neil.Korpusik@sun.com>, chas,
<Ghassan.Khoory@synopsys.com>, <fhaque@cisco.com>, 
<Arif.Samad@synopsys.com>



Hi, SV-* Chairs and Co-chairs,

        After yesterday's P1800 meeting, I can now communicate the
process for work in the P1800 SV-* committees going forward.  Please
note that the schedule is very tight, and that there are some suggested
all day Face-to-Face meetings that need to be scheduled below.

February 22:    The balloting process opens.  As feedback is filed with
the IEEE, it will be forwarded
        to Johny, and he is likely to forward it on to me and the
Champions for preliminary processing
        into buckets (see March 28 below).

        The committees may wish to leave open the opportunity to meet in
this time in case some
        feedback is forwarded to the committee; however, the committees
are NOT         AUTHORIZED to discuss any issue not raised in the ballot
feedback
        forwarded from the Champions until further notice.  Please
update your
        committee agendas as required.

March 24:       The ballot closes.

March 28:       P1800 will receive the accumulated feedback filed with
the balloting.
        This feedback will be given to the Champions to sort into
several buckets:

        1)  Issues that may require substantive changes to the LRM are
forwarded to the SV-* committees
        2)  Issues that are editorial changes will be forwarded to Stu
        3)  Issues that are "not a bug" are commented on appropriately
and passed back to the P1800

        The P1800 recommends that the champions have a face-to-face all
day meeting to complete
        this process.

March 31:  The Champions are complete with their initial classification
and assignment of issues to
        committees.

        The P1800 recommends that the SV-* committees plan an all day
face-to-face to deal with the
        issues raised.  Possible resolutions are:

        1)  Changes are made to the LRM to address the issue
        2)  Addressing the issue is determined to decrease consensus in
the committee is so noted on
                the issues spreadsheet.
        3)  Other determination of the issue is made and is also so
noted in the issues spreadsheet
                Note:  Saying that an issue will be delayed to a future
release is not an allowed response.

April 12:  The committees are complete with their LRM updates and issue
spreadsheet updates.

        The Champions will meet, do their review of LRM changes looking
for inconsistency, etc.
        This is likely to be a phone meeting.

April 15:  The Champions have completed their analysis and the data is
forwarded to the P1800.

April 19:  The P1800 has a WG meeting in Austin to approve the changes
and responses.

May 3:  The updated draft is ready for editorial review of the changes

May 9:  The re-ballot draft is complete

May 10:  Voting on the re-ballot draft starts.

Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns.

Karen

----- end included message -----

-- 
Charles Dawson
Senior Engineering Manager
NC-Verilog Team
Cadence Design Systems, Inc.
270 Billerica Road
Chelmsford, MA  01824
(978) 262 - 6273
chas@cadence.com