Opinions on prospective standards sought
Shane McCarron
ahby at uinj.UI.ORG
Tue Apr 30 02:39:40 AEST 1991
Submitted-by: ahby at uinj.UI.ORG (Shane McCarron)
> Submitted-by: lewine at cheshirecat.webo.dg.com (Donald Lewine)
>
> |> Was the decision of the SEC wrong?
>
> Well, the SEC took away my chance to vote NO!
>
> Given that no POSIX standard has made it through the ballot
> process without major changes, the thought of forcing OSF and
> AT&T to fix some of the larger crocks, has some merit. Also,
> the thought of both draft standards going down to flaming defeat
> and generating a published list of objections seems nice.
While I agree with this sentiment, the scope of both PARs was such
that objections that would cause the interfaces to change
substantially would have been considered unresponsive! At least,
that's how I understood it.
> Seriously, I think the SEC made the only decision possible. I
> don't know why it took 6 hours.
Because everyone had to say something, and because some of the people who
proposed the PARs really wanted them to go through. There was a lot
of screaming and gnashing of teeth. Having said that, as secretary of
the SEC I can tell you that most of the debate wasn't interesting
enough to be minuted.
--
Shane P. McCarron ATT: +1 201 263-8400 x232
Project Manager UUCP: s.mccarron at ui.org
Volume-Number: Volume 23, Number 52
More information about the Comp.std.unix
mailing list