On Mon, Dec 01, 2014 at 02:50:57PM -0700, Jeff Law wrote:
> On 12/01/14 14:44, Cary Coutant wrote:
> >>Presumably we don't have any sense when the values will be assigned, right?
> >>Any chance we could speed that along a bit?
> >
> >As Jason said, the value in the current draft is unlikely to change,
> >and I think he and I can probably lobby to keep it unchanged if there
> >any danger that the numbering will change. The committee doesn't
> >really like it when we jump the gun and use values before the final
> >spec is published, but as a practical matter, it's often necessary and
> >(at this stage) pretty safe.
> Rather than having to lobby to keep it unchanged because we jumped the gun,
> can we lobby to get the number assigned in the near future rather than in
> the potentially far future? That feels more cooperative to me :-)
>
> Would that make Michael happier?
The numbers are assigned and there is a working draft with those numbers,
the thing is just that there is no 100% guarantee they won't be removed or
reassigned. But as Jason/Cary said, we can lobby of for them being kept the
same.
Jakub
