> From: Cornelia Huck <[email protected]> > Sent: Tuesday, January 10, 2023 10:21 AM > > On Tue, Jan 10 2023, Parav Pandit <[email protected]> wrote: > > >> From: [email protected] > >> <[email protected]> On Behalf Of Cornelia Huck > >> > >> On Mon, Jan 09 2023, "Michael S. Tsirkin" <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > Does makediff still work? Documentation says latexpand does not > >> > support import. without latexdiff generating redlined versions > >> > would be very difficult. > >> > > >> > > >> > I am also worried about consistency since we already use \\input. > >> > If using \\input means putting everything in a single directory, > >> > that's a small price to pay: > >> > > >> > virtio-sound.tex + virtio-sound-conformance.tex > >> > > >> > is not fundamentally worse than > >> > device-types/virtio-sound/device.tex > >> > and device-types/virtio-sound/device-conformance.tex > >> > > >> > and it avoids the duplicated "device" in the name. > >> > > >> > Previously it looked like a cosmetic issue, but now it looks like > >> > it's important. > >> > >> I agree, and we need to decide quickly what to do with the ballot. We > >> don't want to merge v1, but the current votes still have a majority > >> of 'yes'. My preference would be to withdraw the ballot, which needs > >> to be done before > >> 22:00 UTC today, if I'm not confused. > >> > >> Parav, what do you think? If you request to withdraw the ballot, > >> that's easy to do; we'll just open a new one once we've agreed on a > >> version. > > > > I am revising the v2 and should be available in 7 pm UTC time. > > This will include, > > a. white space removal at end of the net and blk files b. fix missing > > device conformance links for 4 devices c. import to input d. continue > > with directories e. rename device-types/<name>/device.tex to > > device-types/<name>/description.tex > > Apologies if I sound like a process stickler, but the main problem is that the > ballot is currently about v1 of the patches (and we obviously can't change > that > while it is open, as that would invalidate the votes that already have been > cast.) If it auto invalidates, is there any withdrawal process needed? If no, lets withdraw an re-vote on v3.
> If your v3 looks good, we need a new ballot to vote on that. As it stands now, > the TC would have voted to include v1 with its known problems... that's why I > think a withdrawal would be best. We will use the same github issue for v3, and new ballot yes? --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
