On 04/04/2025 23.41, Herb Sutter wrote:
> *CWG and Shafik*, direction please re just finding all the places to annotate: As we gear up to enlist more people to help gather the draft annotations (since there's a lot of UB to tag), would you prefer we do it in Shafik's branch? Perhaps as PRs? Shafik, is your branch up to date or do we need to keep it up to date? Just trying to determine where we want to collaborate together to start expanding the list.

So, with Shafik's consent, I've made a branch / pull request for the Annex here,
based on Shafik's work:

https://github.com/cplusplus/draft/pull/7826

I've fixed various LaTeX issues that prevented a clean CI build.

Any improvements should be pull requests against the "ub-ifndr" branch and will
amend the pull request above.

> *CWG*, direction please re then actually reviewing batches of those proposed annotations as they get ready to be proposed for the IS draft: Procedurally, for just the annotations of existing UB/IF-NDR (excluding any future 'what to do about each case' changes which would be EWG papers), how does CWG want to see and review batches of annotation additions -- presented as Core wording P papers? as opposed to, say, PRs (which, as was pointed out in EWG, have the drawback of not being available in all countries)?

Shafik's work seems to be pretty comprehensive. There is still work to do
as outlined in P3075, in particular:

- A summary of the issue in the style of a note
(We currently have lots of quotes of the normative rule
in the Annex.)

- No duplication of normative requirements i.e. verbs “shall”, “may”, “might” and “could” are
forbidden but “can” and “could” are allowed


I'd like to have a round of improvements to the existing Annex pull request
without CWG review, where we also distill a wiki page with rules of
engagement. We might also want to change some of the presentation.

When we (Herb, Gasper, editors, who else?) are happy with what we have, we'll
have a CWG review and then merge to the main body. We'll probably have a
P paper with a "current" rendition of the Annex (just cut the pages from
the standard PDF) at that point and get plenary approval on the approach;
I expect further updates to be at the level of "feature-test macros", which
also are quasi-editorial and don't need plenary approval on the individual level.

Given the completeness we already have, I'm confident we can claim we're
complete once that P paper gets approved / merged; any residue are "bugs"
that we can fix in the ordinary course of business.

Jens