From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Neil Jerram Newsgroups: gmane.lisp.guile.devel Subject: Re: [Guile-commits] GNU Guile branch, wip-manual-2, updated. release_1-9-9-85-g0a864be Date: Fri, 16 Apr 2010 22:18:32 +0100 Message-ID: <871vefumdz.fsf@ossau.uklinux.net> References: <87tyrhbn13.fsf@gnu.org> <87iq7xpluz.fsf@ossau.uklinux.net> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1271453135 5863 80.91.229.12 (16 Apr 2010 21:25:35 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 16 Apr 2010 21:25:35 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Ludovic =?iso-8859-1?Q?Court=E8s?= , guile-devel@gnu.org To: Andy Wingo Original-X-From: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Apr 16 23:25:32 2010 connect(): No such file or directory Return-path: Envelope-to: guile-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1O2t2S-0003kM-MI for guile-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 16 Apr 2010 23:25:25 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:50104 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1O2t2S-0005oX-0a for guile-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 16 Apr 2010 17:25:24 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1O2svx-0005bw-9A for guile-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 16 Apr 2010 17:18:41 -0400 Original-Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=32909 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1O2svt-0005W5-ML for guile-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 16 Apr 2010 17:18:40 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1O2svr-00065f-G8 for guile-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 16 Apr 2010 17:18:37 -0400 Original-Received: from mail3.uklinux.net ([80.84.72.33]:33471) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1O2svr-00065I-77; Fri, 16 Apr 2010 17:18:35 -0400 Original-Received: from arudy (host86-186-3-37.range86-186.btcentralplus.com [86.186.3.37]) by mail3.uklinux.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 87C6E1F72A7; Fri, 16 Apr 2010 22:18:33 +0100 (BST) Original-Received: from arudy (arudy [127.0.0.1]) by arudy (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1580F3801F; Fri, 16 Apr 2010 22:18:33 +0100 (BST) In-Reply-To: (Andy Wingo's message of "Thu, 15 Apr 2010 21:40:48 +0200") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.1 (gnu/linux) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.4-2.6 X-BeenThere: guile-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Developers list for Guile, the GNU extensibility library" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.lisp.guile.devel:10242 Archived-At: Andy Wingo writes: > Hi Neil, Hi Andy, > I also think that wip-manual-2 is looking great! Your commit granularity > is also really nice. Thanks. >>>From my perspective each commit is ready! Why not just merge now? It's > getting monotonically better :) OK, I'll do that; thanks for the suggestion. For the sake of explanation: I guess when I started wip-manual-2 I wasn't totally sure that my direction was correct, or that it would meet with approval. But given that it does, I agree that it makes sense now to continue in master. > That way when someone writes new docs, they have a better idea about how > that fits in. For example I need to write something about "nil", and > I'll look at your branch and see where you're going, but if it were > merged already I could just look at the state of master and see where > the right place would be. Yes, absolutely. > I still think it's the right statement to make :) Guile _is_ and _has_ > other things as well, but fundamentally it's a Scheme. IMO at least :) Agreed. Historically and philosophically that's clearly true. And from a practical point of view, however many other languages we support, Scheme will always remain special because the compiler itself is written in Scheme. Regards, Neil