RE: [sv-cc] Editing questions on new let diagrams

Stu,
 
There apparently has been a bad misunderstanding here. I don't know
about 1503, but 2414 is just the VPI part of the 'let' proposal. 1728
("let") no longer contains VPI diagrams, so there is no conflict there.
Apparently 1728 originally did contain such diagrams, but they were
removed in order to remove such conflicts. 2414 says it supercedes 1728
if 1728 still contains VPI diagrams, but it does not.
 
I understand your anger, but let's not assume that more work needs to be
done than really does. 1728 and 2414 are not duplicates and don't even
overlap. Their subject content is merely related.
 
Regards,
Shalom

________________________________

	From: owner-sv-cc@server.eda.org
[mailto:owner-sv-cc@server.eda.org] On Behalf Of Stuart Sutherland
	Sent: Tuesday, September 09, 2008 6:56 AM
	To: 'Bassam Tabbara'; 'SV-CC'
	Subject: RE: [sv-cc] Editing questions on new let diagrams
	
	
	First of all "override" in no way suggests "replace".  It merely
states that this proposal needed to be implemented after the other
proposals, as it might be changing things that were added by the other
proposals.  Second, if 1503 and 1728 were replaced by 2414, then why
were 1503 and 1728 still in the editor-implement status in Mantis?
Those Mantis items should have been closed as having been duplicates of
2414.  This lack of properly maintaining the data base means I wasted
considerable time and effort implementing 1503 (a 21 page proposal) and
1728 (a 13 page proposal), and now need to waste just as much time and
effort finding all the changes and backing them out again.
	 
	Stu
	~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
	Stuart Sutherland
	stuart@sutherland-hdl.com
	+1-503-692-0898
	www.sutherland-hdl.com
	
	
	 
	From: owner-sv-cc@eda.org [mailto:owner-sv-cc@eda.org] On Behalf
Of Bassam Tabbara
	Sent: Monday, September 08, 2008 7:01 PM
	To: stuart@sutherland-hdl.com; SV-CC
	Subject: RE: [sv-cc] Editing questions on new let diagrams
	 
	Hi Stu,
	 
	2414 says to *override 1503 and 1728*, so basically the 2nd part
of your attached pdf would not exist and I think all questions answered.
	 
	Hope this clarifies all, any AI left ? Again proposal says to do
so in green at top, sorry if we misled you somehow. 
	 
	Thx.
	-Bassam.
	From: owner-sv-cc@eda.org [mailto:owner-sv-cc@eda.org] On Behalf
Of Stuart Sutherland
	Sent: Monday, September 08, 2008 6:41 PM
	To: 'SV-CC'
	Subject: [sv-cc] Editing questions on new let diagrams
	 
	Some things do not seem quite right in the VPI diagrams added
for the new "let" construct.  The attached PDF file has the new diagrams
based on what I interpreted from the Mantis items that added and
modified them.  The margin boxes have my questions.
	 
	I expect to complete the editing of draft 7 by the end of day on
Tuesday, September 10.  If there are some obvious corrections, please
add them as a bug note to the appropriate Mantis items, and notify me by
e-mail.  If I receive notice in time, I will try to incorporate the
corrections in draft 7.  Of course, the corrections can also be made
along with any other corrections that will come out of the review of
draft 7.  
	 
	Stu
	~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
	Stuart Sutherland
	stuart@sutherland-hdl.com
	+1-503-692-0898
	www.sutherland-hdl.com
	 
	
	-- 
	This message has been scanned for viruses and 
	dangerous content by MailScanner <http://www.mailscanner.info/>
, and is 
	believed to be clean. 
	
	-- 
	This message has been scanned for viruses and 
	dangerous content by MailScanner <http://www.mailscanner.info/>
, and is 
	believed to be clean. 

	-- 
	This message has been scanned for viruses and 
	dangerous content by MailScanner <http://www.mailscanner.info/>
, and is 
	believed to be clean. 
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Intel Israel (74) Limited

This e-mail and any attachments may contain confidential material for
the sole use of the intended recipient(s). Any review or distribution
by others is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended
recipient, please contact the sender and delete all copies.

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