Re: Re: A plan to help TC39 become more open up to community contributions and participations

>From a curious on-looker: has there been any update on this plan? ___ es-discuss mailing list es-discuss@mozilla.org https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss

Re: A plan to help TC39 become more open up to community contributions and participations

Thank you very much for this complete response. On Wed, Jun 15, 2016 at 5:41 PM, Allen Wirfs-Brock wrote: > > On Jun 6, 2016, at 3:21 AM, Salvador de la Puente González < > sa...@unoyunodiez.com> wrote: > > Excuse my ignorance, but why do we need the legal organization, why to not > simply do th

Re: A plan to help TC39 become more open up to community contributions and participations

> On Jun 15, 2016, at 2:12 PM, Bob Myers wrote: > > If you are referring to the standard ECMA-2 for a subset of ALGOL 60, this > was not a "standard for a programming language", but rather for a particular > ill-advised crippling of ALGOL, which not only removed `own` (sort of static) > varia

Re: A plan to help TC39 become more open up to community contributions and participations

If you are referring to the standard ECMA-2 for a subset of ALGOL 60, this was not a "standard for a programming language", but rather for a particular ill-advised crippling of ALGOL, which not only removed `own` (sort of static) variables, but much more importantly removed the key feature of recur

Re: A plan to help TC39 become more open up to community contributions and participations

Didn't know that. Nice to know! :-) On Wed, Jun 15, 2016, 11:48 Allen Wirfs-Brock wrote: > > On Jun 14, 2016, at 8:57 PM, Isiah Meadows wrote: > > Just an educated guess (I'm not actually involved in any part of this > effort - just a random person subscribed to this list), but I think it's > b

Re: A plan to help TC39 become more open up to community contributions and participations

> On Jun 14, 2016, at 8:57 PM, Isiah Meadows wrote: > > Just an educated guess (I'm not actually involved in any part of this effort > - just a random person subscribed to this list), but I think it's because of > ECMA itself. Granted, TC39 has already noted that this one doesn't exactly > fi

Re: A plan to help TC39 become more open up to community contributions and participations

> On Jun 6, 2016, at 3:21 AM, Salvador de la Puente González > wrote: > > Excuse my ignorance, but why do we need the legal organization, why to not > simply do the GiHub part? > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standards_organization may

Re: A plan to help TC39 become more open up to community contributions and participations

Just an educated guess (I'm not actually involved in any part of this effort - just a random person subscribed to this list), but I think it's because of ECMA itself. Granted, TC39 has already noted that this one doesn't exactly fit well with the rest of their framework, because of the constant and

Re: A plan to help TC39 become more open up to community contributions and participations

Excuse my ignorance, but why do we need the legal organization, why to not simply do the GiHub part? On Fri, Jun 3, 2016 at 6:36 AM, G. Kay Lee < balancetraveller+es-disc...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Allen, thanks for extending your support :-D > > My observation as well as belief is that, if a comm

Re: A plan to help TC39 become more open up to community contributions and participations

Hi Allen, thanks for extending your support :-D My observation as well as belief is that, if a community effort has turned out to be successful, than volunteers will flock together and the movement / organization will be able to self-sustain for quite long enough. So the issue has always been how

Re: A plan to help TC39 become more open up to community contributions and participations

I think this is a very interesting idea. TC39 has put a lot of effort into community transparency over the last decade but Ecma International (really most international standards organization) is organizationally not structured or naturally inclined to directly accept “contributions” from indi

A plan to help TC39 become more open up to community contributions and participations

I'll add that after much contemplation, it *might not* be a wise idea to delegate anyone who wish to attend a certain TC39 meeting as the nonprofit's representative; I cannot tell whether the advantages it brings could outweight the problems that would also come as a result. So perhaps we'll hold t

Re: A plan to help TC39 become more open up to community contributions and participations

This organization is definitely needed and is a laudable effort; the language has made great strides, but it's still in a state where utility libraries fill in gaps in basic functionality, and the current rate of improvement is very uneven, with certain issues that hold the language from becoming '

Re: A plan to help TC39 become more open up to community contributions and participations

@John @Michał ES6 expanded the language greatly indeed, but the expansion is incomplete with lots of glaring holes. I happen to be researching into the crazily deficient Map/Set APIs recently as well, and found a few documents - only from 1.5 years ago but apparently are quickly falling out of pe

Re: A plan to help TC39 become more open up to community contributions and participations

First - thanks for everyone who chipped in; any comment is of immense value here. @Kevin **The "us-vs-them" mentality**: IMHO the mentality kinda came into existence precisely because of the aforementioned fact that the current experience for community participation is not a smooth and - more imp

Re: A plan to help TC39 become more open up to community contributions and participations

To be honest - I can rather see complaining about how small is the standard library, and how many basic functions have to be provided by third party, not by standard library (famous left-pad case). And I think these complaints are right and justified - newly introduced classes like Set are painful

Re: A plan to help TC39 become more open up to community contributions and participations

Maybe also a factor: JS has changed a huge amount in a short time. Developers, browsers, tools need to catch up, digest the changes, decide what real problems remain. We have enough new for now. On Fri, May 27, 2016 at 7:42 AM, Kevin Smith wrote: > Thanks for pointing out some issues with the cu

Re: A plan to help TC39 become more open up to community contributions and participations

Thanks for pointing out some issues with the current state of things. While, in general, having more people directly participate in the committee is probably a good thing, I don't think that will fix the problem. I think you'll find yourself running into the same troubles that the current members

A plan to help TC39 become more open up to community contributions and participations

(This is a continuation of [a previous discussion]( https://esdiscuss.org/topic/tracking-proposals-should-be-standardized-with-issues )) So, to summarize, while rules and platforms currently in place do allow for community contributions, they are hardly friendly ones. A few issues: * The mailing