Subject: Re: [sv-ac] Voting clarification
From: harry (harry@verplex.com)
Date: Thu Sep 26 2002 - 12:06:43 PDT
Hi Faisal,
I would like to offer a suggestion concerning process (this is based on my
experience with the FVTC). Many non-Accellera members have dedicated a big
portion of their personal time to the development of this standard, which
benefits us all. Their voice should be heard to some extent--yet we still
must abide by the Accellera voting rules. Hence, what I did was ask all
eligible non-Acccellera members to go ahead and provide me their votes. I
then would only use their votes to break any potential tie votes.
The advantage of this process is that it completely removed the political
impact of the Chairman breaking votes and thus being perceived as aligning
with any single party (another words, the chairman still leads--but remains
neutral). This is just a suggestion. Obviously you should do what you fell
will work best for your committee. However, the more politics that can be
removed from the process--the better off we all are....
-Harry
----- Original Message -----
From: "Faisal Haque" <fhaque@cisco.com>
To: "Sv-Ac@Eda. Org" <sv-ac@server.eda.org>
Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2002 10:57 AM
Subject: [sv-ac] Voting clarification
> Folks,
>
> Some questions were raised about the voting prcoess so here are a few
> clarifications:
>
> 1) Requirements: David Lacey requested that this be classified as a minor
> vote because with the major votes most of the users are left out of the
> process. We have reviewed the minutes of the previous meetings but were
> unable to identify a specific person requesting that requirements be
treated
> as a major item.
>
> So unless anyone objects I would like to have the requirements vote be a
> simple majority vote of all the participants who meet the attendance
> requirements. If you would like it to be a major vote please make the
> request at the meeting.
>
>
> 2) OVA donation vote:
> a) This vote is to accept OVA as a resource for developing the assertion
> subset for SV3.1. Allowing us to build consensus and create a unified
> platform for the users.
>
> As the chair I have decided that this vote is a critical issue and should
be
> voted on as a major vote. This vote needs to be done within the TCC
criteria
> for donation acceptance which are:
>
> 1- Must be compatible with SystemVerilog
> 2- Must be supported by a commercially available tool
> 3- If any part of the donation is viewed as acceptable, then the donation
> should be accepted.
>
> -Faisal
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Thu Sep 26 2002 - 12:13:51 PDT