RE: Latest posted agenda for SMIng meeting at the 49th IETF...

[rpresuhn-lists@dorothy.bmc.com]

Hi -

..
> Message-ID: <2413FED0DFE6D111B3F90008C7FA61FB0A9842DB@nl0006exch002u.nl.lucent.com>
> From: "Wijnen, Bert (Bert)" <bwijnen@lucent.com>
> To: sming@ops.ietf.org, rpresuhn-lists@dorothy.bmc.com
> Subject: RE: Latest posted agenda for SMIng meeting at the 49th IETF...
> Date: Fri, 29 Dec 2000 17:56:59 +0100
..
> > No matter how hard I squint or cross my eyes, I can't get the
> > current SMING to look like a "merged language".  If we're
> > really intent on going with the new syntax, perhaps we
> > should strike the word "merged" from this charter.
> > 
> That would be fine with me. Or maybe the word "converged" might be
> better. In any event... the goal is that we end up with ONE language
> instead of two. As long as we all understand that.... we're OK.
..

This takes us right back to the point that Jon raised.
"Converged" even more strongly suggests that the offspring
should look like the two parent languages, incestuous
as that may be.

The proposal that is currently before us simply cannot
be described as "merged" or "converged".  If we believe
that this proposal is the direction we are going to take,
we should update the charter accordingly, at least as a
matter of "truth in advertising."

 -------------------------------------------------------
 Randy Presuhn           randy_presuhn@bmc.com
 Voice: +1 408 546-1006  BMC Software, Inc.  1-3141
 Fax:   +1 408 965-0359  2141 North First Street
 http://www.bmc.com/     San José, California 95131  USA
 -------------------------------------------------------
 My opinions and BMC's are independent variables.
 -------------------------------------------------------