Re: [Scheme-reports] R7RS large process discussion WAS Re: final draft of the R7RS small language

[Alex Shinn <alexshinn@x>]

On Thu, Jul 18, 2013 at 10:03 AM, John Cowan <cowan@x> wrote:

Alex Shinn scripsit:

> This seems problematic - people are never really sure if they're
> working on a WG2 SRFI or not.  Although I think it's good to use the
> SRFI process it should be made clear that the SRFI is intended for
> WG2, which should draw a larger audience.

I have no problem with that, and have been doing it.

Indeed, and thanks for that.  But people are asking what

the process is, and you weren't recommending that they

do the same as you.

> and stating the motivation for including it in the large language.

What would this consist of?  Something should go in the large language
because it seems useful for practical Scheme programs.  That's a rather
generic answer.

I basically meant to advertise a little better for busy people.

> The default draft period in this case should be extended to 4 months
> (of course extendible so long as there is active discussion).

I have no desire to try to amend the SRFI process at this point.  In
practice, extensions have been easily achieved.  I really don't want
there to be too much time, such that all sense of momentum is lost.

We don't have to amend the SRFI process, you can just

say in the announcement that since this is an R7RS SRFI

you will automatically be requesting an extension after the

first two months.

-- 

Alex

_______________________________________________
Scheme-reports mailing list
Scheme-reports@x
http://lists.scheme-reports.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/scheme-reports