LC-57 & LC60.1


If you want to make technical comments on this, please do so on IG list 
(e.g., in reply to [1]).


Monday is an telecon OpsGL day.  Now that commitment-group is out of the 
way, our next (maybe only) major one is the re-org proposal in LC-60.1, 
which says in essence:  we have about the right collection of CPs, but a 
strong chronological organization would benefit OpsGL.  And LC-57 requests 
a picture (or table or whatever) to clarify chronology.

The proposal at [1] is basically:  clarify as much as possible (improving 
the 60.x), but avoid any major re-org that doesn't fix something really 
broken (because it will surely send us into another publication cycle, 
which will mean at least 4 months extra time added to OpsGL.)

Silence = agreement.  If you want to talk about it Monday, then please send 
some discussion (on IG).


Received on Wednesday, 7 May 2003 10:53:11 UTC