[r6rs-discuss] meta r6rs

From: Arthur A. Gleckler <arthur>
Date: Thu, 7 Jun 2007 23:49:08 -0700

On Jun 7, 2007, at 11:40 PM, Thomas Lord wrote:

> I am trying to suggest a graceful way to abort the process and
> I'm offering some reasons why that it is a good idea to do so.

I hope that we'll keep the process going just as it is. If R6RS is
not, in fact, ratified, it can still be submitted as an SRFI, or as a
set of SRFIs. But let's let at least give the process a chance.
Many people, most of all the editors, have put a lot of good effort
into R6RS. Even if not everyone agrees with the editors on
everything in the document, we owe them at least the courtesy of
voting for or against ratification.
Received on Fri Jun 08 2007 - 02:49:08 UTC