[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Agenda for September meeting

> Earlier I said that I wanted to leave by Friday noon, but in putting
> together the agenda it became clear that 1 1/2 days wasn't enough time.
> Hence we've written the agenda for two full days.  Is that okay with
> everyone?

Yes, this is fine.

> Discuss written proposals on major areas, circulated over the network
> before the meeting and brought to the meeting in hardcopy.  Spend no
> more than 45 minutes on each proposal, determining yes, no, or needs
> further discussion.  Expected areas for proposals: object creation, new
> draft of metaclass chapter, change-class, 1 or 2 others.

I'd like to put in debugging support under the "1 or 2 others" if nobody
has any strong objections. I'll rewrite the proposal based on the comments 
Dave sent and resubmit to the network within the next week. The reason is, 
our developers seem to need it.

> Mail out hardcopies of the latest version of the 87-002 document
> immediately (no further editing is planned, right?).

Yes, this is very definitely needed, as soon as possible.


The rest of the agenda looks good to me. I have no particular preference
about where the meeting is held, just as long as the location is mailed
out ahead of time, so I can get there on time.

With regard to the spec documentation, I'd like to put in a vote for an ASCII
version to go on parcvax, along with the portable source, so people don't
have to be working in the dark with it. The ASCII version doesn't
necessarily have to be up to the current level of discussion and 
decision within the committee (indeed, it probably shouldn't) but should
reflect approximately what is implemented. If there is some problem with
deTeXing it, we have some OCR software here which I'd be willing to give
a try at scanning it in with. Alternatively, Linda and Dick's paper from
ECOOP would be a possible source, although it's more of an overview (and
looks like it would probably be easier to scan in).