search

rsnikhil / Temporary_TGISA

Temporary work site for another project (please ignore until public announcement)
0 stars 0 forks source link

comparison table -- "planned" status? #1

Closed benjaminselfridge closed 5 years ago

benjaminselfridge commented 5 years ago

I was thinking it might make sense to add, beyond a simple "yes"/"no" value for some of the features, perhaps a "planned" value to indicate that although a feature may not be available at the present time, it will be developed. There are several such things for GRIFT (i.e. booting Linux, test generation), as I'm sure there are for the other specs, and it would be nice to be able to indicate this somehow.

PeterSewell commented 5 years ago

On 27/02/2019, Ben Selfridge notifications@github.com wrote:

I was thinking it might make sense to add, beyond a simple "yes"/"no" value for some of the features, perhaps a "planned" value to indicate that although a feature may not be available at the present time, it will be developed. There are several such things for GRIFT (i.e. booting Linux, test generation), as I'm sure there are for the other specs, and it would be nice to be able to indicate this somehow.

I thought about that, but it would just end up with a lot of "planned" of unclear status, for many of the models. I think best to keep the table clearly factual, and discuss plans in the template document where one can also explain (eg) when such plans might be executed.

best, Peter

-- You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rsnikhil/Temporary_TGISA/issues/1

benjaminselfridge commented 5 years ago

Makes sense.