Re: [sv-ac] RE: Open Mantis items

Hi Dmitry,

Yes, duplicate is the correct resolution in this situation.

The SV-AC should vote on this before setting the
mantis resolution to duplicate. The committee vote will then
be recorded as a note in the mantis item. This vote is then
reviewed by the Champions and the Working Group.

Neil

On 04/10/11 04:07, Bresticker, Shalom wrote:
> "duplicate of" is ok.
>
>
>
> (In the future, Neil is the authority for such questions.)
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Shalom
>
>
>
> *From:* Korchemny, Dmitry
> *Sent:* Sunday, April 10, 2011 2:06 PM
> *To:* Tapan Kapoor; 'sv-ac@eda-stds.org'
> *Cc:* Bresticker, Shalom
> *Subject:* RE: Open Mantis items
>
>
>
> Hi Tapan,
>
>
>
> I would say that it should be marked as “duplicate of”, because “child”
> means that the parent issue for its resolution requires the resolution
> of the child issue first. Copying Shalom to be on the safe side.
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Dmitry
>
>
>
> *From:* Tapan Kapoor [mailto:tkapoor@cadence.com]
> *Sent:* Wednesday, April 06, 2011 08:41
> *To:* Korchemny, Dmitry; 'sv-ac@eda-stds.org'
> *Subject:* RE: Open Mantis items
>
>
>
> Hi Dmitry,
>
>
>
> Regarding mantis 2271, as per our past discussion(s), it (2271) is
> completely covered/addressed by proposal for 2412. What should be the
> procedure to mark/update it? Should I mark it “child” of 2412?
>
>
>
> Warm regards,
>
> Tapan
>
> "You must be the change you want to see in the world" : Mahatma Gandhi
>
> *From:* owner-sv-ac@eda.org [mailto:owner-sv-ac@eda.org] *On Behalf Of
> *Korchemny, Dmitry
> *Sent:* Tuesday, March 15, 2011 5:31 PM
> *To:* 'sv-ac@eda-stds.org'
> *Subject:* [sv-ac] Open Mantis items
>
>
>
> Hi all,
>
>
>
> I am attaching a spreadsheet with open Mantis items along with the
> recommendations regarding their processing made at SV-AC F2F meeting.
>
>
>
> The following recommendations have been made:
>
> · WIP – the items are targeted to be addressed at the current PAR
>
> · Postpone – the items are not targeted to be addressed at the
> current PAR (to be addressed or reevaluated at the next PAR)
>
> · Next PAR – items targeted for the current PAR, but we don’t
> have a sufficient bandwidth to address them now.
>
> · Close – the items are non-relevant or duplicate.
>
> · Address if feasible – the item owner to decide.
>
>
>
> Every item was assigned an owner.
>
>
>
> Action items required from the item owner:
>
> · Check whether you agree with the recommendation. If you don’t,
> send an email with an alternative recommendation to be discussed in the
> SV-AC meeting.
>
> · If the recommendation is “address if feasible”, modify it to
> WIP if you intend working on it during this PAR or to Postpone
> otherwise. If your recommendation is different from these two, send an
> email with a discussion request.
>
> · If the ultimate recommendation is “Close”, confirm this
> recommendation by email and we will vote to resolve this item as “No
> change required”.
>
> · Set the priority of issues ultimately marked as WIP and Close
> to high, to all other issues to low.
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Dmitry
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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* <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* <http://www.mailscanner.info/>, and is
> believed to be clean.

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