Gary Winiger wrote:
>>> If it's the commonly-held opinion of those who work on drivers, then I
>>> don't think it should face many problems. If you've discussed it in
>>> the appropriate group first, then I see no problem with using a
>>> fast-track to establish the new ARC-wide rule.
>>>
>>>
>> 99% true (IMHO)
>>
>> The trouble is that only one ARC sees fast-tracks.
>>
>
> We've -- indeed I belive you, Joe have run fast tracks a sac-review.
> Unfortunately there's no external sac-review mail. Only psarc-ext
> exists now to do this in an OS.O review.
>
> Gary..
>
Yea, I've been known to do that.
I've also just run them as:
To: psarc
CC: lsarc
CC: <submitter>
Where "lsarc" could be what I believe are the interested parties.
Somethings may be interesting to {psarc, lsarc, wsarc}, but not (for
example) fwarc.
I'd assume that:
To: psarc-ext
CC: lsarc
CC: wsarc
...
CC: <submitter>
Should be OK. (John?)
Note, the mail file (etc) are just in the PSARC case directory.
Alternately, I'd assume that it could just be a psarc-ext case with a
posting of its existance to sac-review or "all-arcs" or whatever.
If it is to be a "arc wide document", it should be seen by all the
arcs. The details aren't very important.
- jek3
