grout@cadillac.cad.mcc.com (Steve Grout) (05/31/89)
The 'Call for discussion - Proposed VHDL News Group' several
months ago resulted in the following summarized responses. There
was really not a lot of inputs. Those that did respond either
voted for the subject proposal or felt that creation of such a
newsgroup at this time was not per normal practices for USENET..
In view of these inputs and below specific inputs and in looking
over the existing newsgroups, I would am modifying my proposal as
follows:
o Old proposal - creation of 'comp.vhdlrrandyharr,rwaxman,jhines,
hcarter,phunter,jwillner
The 'Call for discussion - Proposed VHDL News Group' several
months ago resulted in the following summarized responses. There
was really not a lot of inputs. Those that did respond either
voted for the subject proposal or felt that creation of such a
newsgroup at this time was not per normal practices for USENET..
In view of these inputs and below specific inputs and in looking
over the existing newsgroups, I would am modifying my proposal as
follows:
o Old proposal - creation of 'comp.vhdl with anticipated
subgroups below it.
o NEW PROPOSAL - creation of comp.lang.vhdl as a subgroup below
the existing comp.lang series (comp.ada, comp.c, comp.c++,
comp.lisp, etc.)
This writer would like to note that the inputs about a specific
newsgroup for vhdl as being premature are reasonable especially
in light of USENET practices and in view of modest number of
messages currently showing up in places like comp.lsi.
...BUT it should also be noted that VHDL is ALREADY an IEEE
standard, already required for ALL integrated circuits (ASICS,
etc.) in that you MUST create WORKING vhdl descriptions for all
levels that you specify your ASIC designs, with PC board level
etc of design waiting only for VHDL models to become more widely
available before VHDL will be required at all levels of
electronics/electrical design. That is certainly the intent and
activity of the DoD/Triservices and most the rest of the
electronics industry.
There are already even several cases where contractors have be
required to go back and create vhdl descriptions. The VHDL
analyzers/compilers/simulators exist with some 7 tools on the
street with several more ready to ship in the next quarter or so.
The problem tho will be in educating designers on effectively
creating of good vhdl descriptions.
The subject proposed newsgroup it is felt anticipates the
specific need of a vhdl USENET forum.
It would seem that if we don't at this time form a vhdl-specific
newsgroup, the current natural newsgroups to be used are comp.lsi
and comp.lsi.cad. The problem is that these two newsgroup
indicate a 'LSI' or integrated circuit focus, whereas VHDL is
really not aimed only at that class of electronic circuits and
systems.
Therefore, the proposed 'comp.lang.vhdl' is offered as a
compromise to the several objections but definitely ahead of
there being any large volume of news yet.
This writer also urges that the related EDIF newsgroup proposal
likewise be modified to reflect 'comp.lang.edif' as being
appropriate within current newsgroup practises.
YOUR comments and discussion on this modified proposal are
requested, both for and against...
In the meantime, we should continue our vhdl related discussions
under comp.lsi, comp.lsi.cad, and comp.org.ieee as may be
appropriate.
Again, thanks for all your inputs!....
--Steve Grout
------------------------ summarized vhdl newsgroup inputs.... ------------
NO - rja: Felt we should instead use comp.lang.vhdl as more natural wrt
to existing newsgroups.
YES BUT ...!sun!sunburn!dover!waters (Mike Waters): agreed with proposal
but felt it should be
called something like comp.std.vhdl. This person had earlier
posted a call for discussion wrt an EDIF, a standard notation
dominantly focused on the physical level of electronics.
NO - chip@ateng.ateng.com (Chip Salzenberg): felt a mailing list should be used
first as per normal procedures and therefore the proposal was
premature.
YES - amc!markf@uunet.UU.NET (Mark Freeman): agreed with comp.vhdl name as well.
YES - milano!nluug.nl!htsa!cees@cs.utexas.edu (Cees Keyer): agreed.
YES - hundt@paul.rutgers.edu (Thomas M. Hundt): agreed.
NO - Martyn Thomas <mcvax!praxis!mct@uunet.UU.NET>: Felt that vhdl should
be handled by other newsgroups until volume required
splitting it out.
YES - Thomas Kropf Universitaet Karlsruhe <kropf@ira.uka.de>: agreed.
YES - kagenski@apollo.com: agreed.o
NO - Zenier: Felt we should setup comp.cad first, then wait until VHDL is needed.
----------------- end vhdl newsgroup inputs summary -----------------------
--
Steve Grout, MCC CAD Program | Box 200195, Austin, TX 78720
ARPA: grout@mcc.com | Phone: [512] 338-3516
UUCP: {uunet,harvard,gatech,pyramid}!cs.utexas.edu!milano!cadillac!groutkagenski@apollo.COM (Joe Kagenski) (05/31/89)
In light of the low postive response for creating a separate VHDL related
newsgroup, I'll suggest the following:
1) Best would be to help push for creation of COMP.CAD, this news list
would allow for general cad discussions, getting away from the lsi
related concrens that have been previously stated. VHDL discussions
would be more than appropriate for this news list. If the level of
discussion gets high enough on VHDL topics, then COMP.CAD.VHDL could
be created then.
2) create a maillist to support a VHDL only discussion.
this is not necessarily the best, but it would focus the discussions
and may actually allow others to be involved that do not have access
to USENET news lists. You could cross-post info from the maillist
to USENET, as summarys if deemed appropriate.
I personally would prefer to not see it attached to a 'lang' newslist
since VHDL isn't a programming language.
joe
--
Joe Kagenski -CAE Logic Design Tools * ARPA: kagenski@apollo.com
Hewlett Packard/Apollo Division * UUCP: {decvax, mit-eddie...}!apollo!kagenski
330 Billerica Road; Chelmsford, Ma 01824 * Voice: 508-256-6600 *FAX: 508-256-2384bsd@faline.bellcore.com (Bruce Davie) (06/01/89)
Rather than forming a VHDL newsgroup, how about a general HDL newsgroup. Since there's currently comp.lang for programming languages, how about comp.hdl for hardware description languages. comp.hdl.vhdl would then be the logical place for a VHDL newsgroup, but we could have some discussion on other HDLs in other subgroups or in comp.hdl Bruce Davie Bell Communications Research bsd@bellcore.com