RE: [sv-bc] SV-BC Meeting Time Adjustment?

The sv-sc was created with the understanding that the other technical
committees would be suspended and any additional work would have to be
authorized by the WG.

I thought that lack of resources was what caused the creation of this
new committee in the first place. As the sv-sc has already agreed to
meet weekly, I certainly don't have the resources to commit more time if
the other committees continue.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-sv-bc@server.eda.org [mailto:owner-sv-bc@server.eda.org]
On
> Behalf Of Brad Pierce
> Sent: Monday, April 21, 2008 12:56 PM
> To: sv-bc@server.eda.org
> Subject: RE: [sv-bc] SV-BC Meeting Time Adjustment?
> 
> I agree with Matt.
> 
> -- Brad
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-sv-bc@eda.org [mailto:owner-sv-bc@eda.org] On Behalf Of
> Maidment, Matthew R
> Sent: Monday, April 21, 2008 12:51 PM
> To: Neil.Korpusik@sun.com
> Cc: Bresticker, Shalom; Clifford E. Cummings; sv-bc@eda.org
> Subject: RE: [sv-bc] SV-BC Meeting Time Adjustment?
> 
> I likely can readjust my schedule but I'm definitely opposed if we
lose
> Shalom's participation and strongly against cutting back to a 1 hour
> duration.
> 
> Matt
> --
> Matt Maidment
> mmaidmen@ichips.intel.com
> 
> 
> 
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: Neil.Korpusik@Sun.COM [mailto:Neil.Korpusik@Sun.COM]
> >Sent: Monday, April 21, 2008 10:18 AM
> >To: Maidment, Matthew R
> >Cc: Bresticker, Shalom; Clifford E. Cummings; sv-bc@eda.org
> >Subject: Re: [sv-bc] SV-BC Meeting Time Adjustment?
> >
> >Hi Matt,
> >
> >The proposal was to also limit the sv-ec meetings to 1 hour.
> >Mehdi is on the sv-sc conference call and is ok with this
> >proposal.
> >
> >Neil
> >
> >
> >Maidment, Matthew R wrote:
> >> I agree with Shalom on this as well.  And what of the EC?
> >Is their work
> >> done
> >> or on alternate weeks from BC?
> >>
> >> --
> >> Matt Maidment
> >> mmaidmen@ichips.intel.com
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>> -----Original Message-----
> >>> From: Bresticker, Shalom
> >>> Sent: Monday, April 21, 2008 9:50 AM
> >>> To: Clifford E. Cummings; Maidment, Matthew R;
sv-bc@server.eda.org
> >>> Subject: RE: [sv-bc] SV-BC Meeting Time Adjustment?
> >>>
> >>> That might not be convenient for me. 9 AM PDT is 7 PM for me,
> >>> 11 AM is 9 PM for me.
> >>> If it is a one-time change, that is one thing, but a many-time
> >>> change is another.
> >>> Also, I would not like shortening the SV-BC meeting to one hour.
> >>> In our last meeting, we still filled two hours and did not
> >>> finish all business.
> >>>
> >>> Shalom
> >>>
> >>>> -----Original Message-----
> >>>> From: owner-sv-bc@server.eda.org
> >>>> [mailto:owner-sv-bc@server.eda.org] On Behalf Of Clifford
> >E. Cummings
> >>>> Sent: Monday, April 21, 2008 7:44 PM
> >>>> To: Maidment, Matthew R; sv-bc@server.eda.org
> >>>> Subject: [sv-bc] SV-BC Meeting Time Adjustment?
> >>>>
> >>>> Hi, All & Matt -
> >>>>
> >>>> At the SV-SC committee meeting this morning, it was motioned
> >>>> to hold SV-SC meetings weekly on Monday mornings from 9-11AM
> >>>> and I took an action item to propose that the SV-BC move its
> >>>> meeting to 11-12 on the Mondays when we meet. All SV-BC
> >>>> members on the conference call agreed that the adjustment
> >>>> would be acceptable. Could we move our next meeting to next
> >>>> Monday from 11-12 PDT?
> >>>>
> >>>> Regards - Cliff
> >>>>
> >>>> ----------------------------------------------------
> >>>> Cliff Cummings - Sunburst Design, Inc.
> >>>> 14314 SW Allen Blvd., PMB 501, Beaverton, OR 97005
> >>>> Phone: 503-641-8446 / FAX: 503-641-8486
> >>>> cliffc@sunburst-design.com / www.sunburst-design.com Expert
> >>>> Verilog, SystemVerilog, Synthesis and Verification Training
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> --
> >>>> 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.