Set unprioritized issues with status=LEWG to priority 4

Author: jwakely

xml/issue0936.xml

@@ -6,6 +6,7 @@
 <section><sref ref="[thread.mutex.requirements]"/></section>
 <submitter>Pete Becker</submitter>
 <date>5 Dec 2008</date>
+<priority>4</priority>
 
 <discussion>
 
@@ -103,6 +104,8 @@ and should be rephrased as such.
 <p>
 SG1: Agreement that we need a paper.
 </p>
+
+<note>2025-10-21; Priority set to 4 based on age of issue and lack of activity.</note>
 </discussion>
 
 <resolution>

xml/issue0961.xml

@@ -6,6 +6,7 @@
 <section><sref ref="[thread.mutex.requirements]"/></section>
 <submitter>Pete Becker</submitter>
 <date>7 Jan 2009</date>
+<priority>4</priority>
 
 <discussion>
 <p>
@@ -42,6 +43,8 @@ Mark as NAD Future.
 <p>
 SG1: Agreement that we need a paper.
 </p>
+
+<note>2025-10-21; Priority set to 4 based on age of issue and lack of activity.</note>
 </discussion>
 
 <resolution>

xml/issue1459.xml

@@ -8,6 +8,7 @@
 <section><sref ref="[atomics.order]"/></section>
 <submitter>Canada</submitter>
 <date>25 Aug 2010</date>
+<priority>4</priority>
 
 <discussion>
 <p><b>Addresses CA-21, GB-131</b></p>
@@ -124,6 +125,8 @@ a resolution at this stage.
 Moved to NAD Future
 </p>
 
+
+<note>2025-10-21; Priority set to 4 based on age of issue and lack of activity.</note>
 </discussion>
 
 <resolution>

xml/issue1484.xml

@@ -6,6 +6,7 @@
 <section><sref ref="[thread.thread.class]"/></section>
 <submitter>INCITS</submitter>
 <date>25 Aug 2010</date>
+<priority>4</priority>
 
 <discussion>
 <p><b>Addresses US-183</b></p>
@@ -39,6 +40,8 @@ There has not been much demand for it, and it would usually be difficult to deal
 It can be approximated with a condition variable wait followed by an unconditional <tt>join</tt>. Adding it would create 
 implementation issues on Posix. As always, this may be revisited if we have a paper exploring the issues in detail.
 </p>
+
+<note>2025-10-21; Priority set to 4 based on age of issue and lack of activity.</note>
 </discussion>
 
 <resolution>

xml/issue1488.xml

@@ -6,6 +6,7 @@
 <section><sref ref="[thread.mutex]"/></section>
 <submitter>INCITS</submitter>
 <date>25 Aug 2010</date>
+<priority>4</priority>
 
 <discussion>
 <p><b>Addresses US-185</b></p>
@@ -47,6 +48,8 @@ SG1 recommends: Close as NAD
 Papers about C compatibility are welcome, but there may be more pressing issues. C threads are not consistently available 
 at this point, so there seems to be little demand to fix this particular problem.
 </p>
+
+<note>2025-10-21; Priority set to 4 based on age of issue and lack of activity.</note>
 </discussion>
 
 <resolution>

xml/issue1493.xml

@@ -6,6 +6,7 @@
 <section><sref ref="[thread.mutex.requirements]"/></section>
 <submitter>INCITS</submitter>
 <date>25 Aug 2010</date>
+<priority>4</priority>
 
 <discussion>
 <p><b>Addresses US-189</b></p>
@@ -51,6 +52,8 @@ Several participants voiced strong objections, based on either memory model issu
 already possible to write a wrapper that explicitly tracks ownership for testing in the owning thread, which may have 
 been part of the intent here.
 </p>
+
+<note>2025-10-21; Priority set to 4 based on age of issue and lack of activity.</note>
 </discussion>
 
 <resolution>