|
|
|
|
|
|
by bloppe
1030 days ago
|
|
|
I've been trying to get up to speed myself. It seems like the best way is simply reading the mailing list and checking out the codeberg issues. This issue [1] was given as an example of a non-technical problem that's easy to get distracted by when most of the core technical work should be straightforward. It's referenced in this candidacy statement [2] for John's chair position which is a good read to understand what's happening. It's essentially the classic language debate of breaking compatibility with past version versus evolving the language, and seems pretty complicated. I'm sure there are other problems. I'm still reading. [1]: https://codeberg.org/scheme/r7rs/issues/126
[2]: https://groups.google.com/g/scheme-reports-wg2/c/TUbmlPY9lR0 |
|
|
> The establishment of the central issue tracker is, I reckon, more to blame for the current disputes. The old model of periodic ballots provided the community with focus; the issue tracker has the problem that, since all currently outstanding problems are listed in one place, any such problem can become a focus of attention at any time, and then arguments about the details of that problem erupt. John has observed in #scheme that the more into detail we get, the more we seem to argue, which seems accurate. It has also, in practice, become a place where issues related to the Foundations only are discussed, and work on the Batteries has mostly stalled. Mea culpa!