Re: [vhdl-200x] Code sharing

Hi all,
My view is that we could discuss about what to do with the open source
libraries in an IEEE reflector, for example, perhaps discuss on which of
the library features we would like to standardize, or say start up a
discussion about a certain method that the library uses which actually
works around a language limitation. For the second scenario, it would be
good that the open source package authors / contributors post up their
suggestions on the IEEE reflector explaining about the desired language
feature(s) and how the existing packages work around those limitations.

Then, leave the rest of the discussion on the IEEE reflector to decide on
further improvements to the standard that solves those limitations, or even
discuss whether we would want to standardize parts (or the whole) open
source packages.

I know it gets a bit tricky when an individual is part of the IEEE VHDL WG
as well as an open source community. Perhaps when posting as an open source
contributor to an IEEE reflector, discuss only things that have already
been developed in the open source project. IEEE can't lay claims on things
that have already been developed by another project.
You could also discuss language limitations and how those open source
packages work around them. For this, if the IEEE WG decide on implementing
a new language enhancement, then of course that enhancement would be part
of the IEEE standard and copyrighted by IEEE. I think this is fine.
Future versions of the open source packages could still use this new
language feature(s).

Comments welcome.

regards, daniel

On 2 June 2012 01:58, Ken Campbell <sckoarn@storm.ca> wrote:

> Disconnect all this effort from the working group.
>
> Start up a new reflector.
>
> Disconnect effort this from IEEE, take it to a public group.
>
> I would be willing to contribute, but not if there is even a slim chance
> the work could get claimed by an agency like IEEE.
>
> Ken
>
> > Hi Jim,
> > I do not think this has anything to do with eda.org since that is an
> > independent organization that has no formal association with the IEEEE.
> > The issue is what constitutes a work product of the working group and
> what
> > is done by an independent group.
> >
> > I wish you luck on this. The last time I tried to fight this battle there
> > was not much room to negotiate with the IEEE.
> >
> > Regards
> > David
> >
> > David W. Smith
> > Synopsys Scientist
> >
> > Synopsys, Inc.
> > Synopsys Technology Park
> > 2025 NW Cornelius Pass Road
> > Hillsboro, OR 97124
> >
> > Voice: 503.547.6467
> > Main: 503.547.6000
> > Cell: 503.560.5389
> > FAX: 503.547.6906
> > Email: david.smith@synopsys.com
> > http://www.synopsys.com
> >
> > Saber Accelerates Robust Design
> > Predictable. Repeatable. Reliable. Proven.
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: owner-vhdl-200x@eda.org [mailto:owner-vhdl-200x@eda.org] On Behalf
> > Of Jim Lewis
> > Sent: Tuesday, May 29, 2012 12:48 PM
> > To: vhdl-200x@eda.org
> > Subject: Re: [vhdl-200x] Code sharing
> >
> > Hi Joan,
> > With the current economy, EDA vendors want cost effective ways of
> > implementing verification features.
> > One trade-off we are going to need to make is between implementing
> > features as syntax and implementing features in open source sharable
> > libraries.
> >
> > I for see the development of these libraries as open source rather than
> > IEEE standards as they will need to be kept on a much shorter update and
> > review cycle than IEEE balloting facilitates.
> >
> > At a minimum, we will need a large degree of cooperation and interaction
> > between the standards group and the people developing open source
> > libraries. If these open source libraries are going to be a candidate
> > replacement for language syntax features, the VHDL committee may wish to
> > review these libraries and comment on them on this reflector and in IEEE
> > VHDL meetings.
> >
> > Since the set of people working on the two projects overlaps, it would be
> > simpler from an administration perspective that we use a shared email
> > reflector for both activities.
> >
> > So if we discuss what we are doing as an open source community on the
> > VHDL-200X reflector (hosted on eda.org) and/or the VHDL-200X reflector
> is
> > shared between an IEEE project and an open source VHDL library project,
> is
> > IEEE going to make any claims to the work produced?
> > If so, how do we coordinate activity between an IEEE working group and an
> > open source VHDL library group?
> >
> > If we need a separate reflector for the open source work, do we need a
> > separate reflector? I note that eda.org hosts both Accellera groups,
> some
> > of which produce open source libraries, as well as IEEE groups.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Jim
> >
> >> Hi Jim,
> >>
> >> As you know, the IEEE owns the copyright to anything developed in the
> >> WG.
> > > The old packages have the IEEE copyright statement in them. Likewise,
> > > IEEE would own the copyright to new packages if they are
> >> developed by the WG.
> >>
> >> Regards,
> >> Joan
> >
> > --
> > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> > Jim Lewis
> > Director of Training mailto:Jim@SynthWorks.com
> > SynthWorks Design Inc. http://www.SynthWorks.com
> > 1-503-590-4787
> >
> > Expert VHDL Training for Hardware Design and Verification
> > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> >
> > --
> > This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by
> > MailScanner, and is believed to be clean.
> >
> >
> > --
> > This message has been scanned for viruses and
> > dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
> > believed to be clean.
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> This message has been scanned for viruses and
> dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
> believed to be clean.
>
>

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