[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [regrep] We had more business to conduct this morning!
Breininger, Kathryn R wrote: > I was reviewing the TC processes and discovered that we needed to > conduct a little more business with the erratas! I would like to > propose that we do this via e-mail, if possible. Below is what we needed > to do (sorry - my fault for not having it in front of me this morning!). > > > We did item (a) this morning. We need to confirm by full majority vote > that the proposed corrections do not constitute a substantive change > (item b), and then we need to agree to submit the proposed erratas for a > 15-day public review (item c). > > Could we have a brief discussion via e-mail, and if agreeable, would you > like me to set up electronic votes in Kavi for items b and c? (this > would be a total of 4 ballots, two for each errata). > > Please respond with agreement, suggestions, or discussion! > > Dear colleagues, I agree on the record that the RIM *and* RS errata do not constitute a substantive change (item b) and that we should to submit the proposed erratas for a 15-day public review (item c). I thought we had voted to conducted ballots via email for the TC. Can we do that instead of KAVI? If so I vote Yes on all 4 ballots. 1. I agree that the RIM errata do not constitute a substantive change 2. I agree that the RS errata do not constitute a substantive change 3. I agree that the RIM errata be submitted for a 15-day public review 4. I agree that the RS errata be submitted for a 15-day public review Thank you. -- Regards, Farrukh Web: http://www.wellfleetsoftware.com