Re: PAC: Suggested language for CS 6

[Jon Bosak <Jon.Bosak@eng.sun.com>]

[Karl Best, responding to Tommie Usdin:]

| > If we are to accept this "lets do it one way until it becomes
| > inconvenient and then revisit" suggestion I think we should
| > revisit most of the decisions the committee has made.  Most of the
| > process we are drafting is overkill at this time!
| 
| It's certainly not my place as a latecomer to suggest starting
| over on everything. But if there's a way to accomodate both the
| current level of activity as well as possible future large numbers
| I think we should do it.

No, I don't think there is such a way.  If that way existed, it
would be what we have right now.

In December we put in place a process that is designed to carry us
through to June.  In June we are scheduled to complete a revised
process that will go out to the membership for a vote and, if
accepted, will provide a TC process for the future.  I don't see
any point in discussing something in between an interim process
and a long-term process.  Our objective is to finish this up.

Jon