On Mon, Sep 30, 2024 at 8:24 PM Antero Mejr <[email protected]> wrote:
> I would be happy to work on a portable reference libraries. However, it > would be foolish to invest the time, since as it stands there is no way > of knowing if others in the Scheme community would accept such a thing > or push back. Or where to even host such a project. And a reference > library, by definition, would need the support of those in charge. > Many in the Scheme community would be thrilled. I'm among them. We don't have a way to enforce compliance, but we've made great progress by persuasion based on good designs and sample implementations, e.g. through the SRFI process and RnRS. It's a small community, so we rely on cooperation even more than languages with industrial backing. Users and implementers are eager to adopt good work. And we're careful to do much of our work in public, e.g. on the SRFI mailing lists, so that you can gauge enthusiasm before investing effort. On the contrary, Daphne just explained why a Scheme Foundation is not in > the cards, even though some people want it. A foundation would be great > for coordinating with other projects, setting up shared project > infrastructure and documentation, etc. It's just not the direction > people want to go. > Daphne said that the Steering Committee isn't interested in it, but they matter less and less because they don't participate much any more. (Marc Feeley is an exception.) And the SC probably aren't interested because setting up and running such a thing requires work. If you're interested in putting effort into that, though, no one would stop you. I recommend getting in touch with Lassi Kortela, who has been trying to recruit people for projects like that for a long time. He has done a ton of work on setting up scheme.org, for example.
