1) All of the work forward on p6 design seems to come from either Larry or Damian. (If there are others working in the shadows back there, please make yourselves heard.) Most, if not all, the discussions of recent has been of the form "How does <concept x> work in relation to <feature y> mentioned in <Apoc/Ex z>?". While meaningful and worthwhile topics all, they do not drive the language forward terribly fast.
2) Reality is constantly interrupting Larry and Damian's efforts in rather nasty ways.
Taken separately, either of these trends are bothersome. Taken together, this feels like a problem.
So the next question is, is there anything that can be done to improve matters?
I'm moderately certain that everyone wishes they could do something about #2, I'm moderately sure that the p6 community has done as much as they can on that account.
So my real question is, is there any way for the community to get together and help take some of the load off these two in the design, or is the current process the Best We Can Do (tm) and we just need to practice that most unvirtuous of things "patience"?
Can apocalypses be something more along the line of scratches on the wall, that then go through some level of deciphering or translation into something closer to English? Are there topics that need brainstorming that this list could take over?
I certainly don't want the language to loose the internal cohesiveness that all languages need, and am suitably scared of "design by committee"... but I'd like to think that there's something that could be done to help matters.
Comments? Suggestions?
-- Rod Adams
PS -- I'm willing to commit several hrs a week to the effort.
