From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Andy Wingo Newsgroups: gmane.lisp.guile.user,gmane.lisp.guile.devel Subject: Re: 2.2 git users should switch to stable-2.2 branch Date: Mon, 15 May 2017 21:55:12 +0200 Message-ID: <8760h1q4in.fsf@pobox.com> References: <87vap8plv6.fsf@pobox.com> <871srv1866.fsf@dustycloud.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1494878172 1291 195.159.176.226 (15 May 2017 19:56:12 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 15 May 2017 19:56:12 +0000 (UTC) User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.1 (gnu/linux) Cc: guile-user@gnu.org, guile-devel@gnu.org To: Christopher Allan Webber Original-X-From: guile-user-bounces+guile-user=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon May 15 21:56:08 2017 Return-path: Envelope-to: guile-user@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1dAM6C-0000E5-0I for guile-user@m.gmane.org; Mon, 15 May 2017 21:56:08 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:38464 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dAM6H-00086K-GT for guile-user@m.gmane.org; Mon, 15 May 2017 15:56:13 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:51167) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dAM5a-00084O-Qu for guile-user@gnu.org; Mon, 15 May 2017 15:55:31 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dAM5a-0002ef-0o for guile-user@gnu.org; Mon, 15 May 2017 15:55:30 -0400 Original-Received: from pb-sasl1.pobox.com ([64.147.108.66]:55116 helo=sasl.smtp.pobox.com) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dAM5T-0002aG-V7; Mon, 15 May 2017 15:55:24 -0400 Original-Received: from sasl.smtp.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-sasl1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AE8D6784DE; Mon, 15 May 2017 15:55:21 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=LkwhMXkP9K9Oe9Cr4z4bn8NYb6Q=; b=B98/3M UFxWG7XW4Vmp8gDLhJ6YUkjtjdc79uL/n3CnayPy4rxn9wQUnS1yIe/EOcxG2yqK LAhW5onY+pYeWVOtFapO2dMKjLcLrCQ65xKt+MYw/ZuPIXs9EQgzRyjFMd6ggUqx DWlqx2IWDODZV2JxvRkPhwq/DDHKReV02eJfg= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; q=dns; s=sasl; b=GhMh9XWMuUzjnULGGC5qnMhV25/Qz/FB GIjQhAdaBCdjAf6zn5W0sqUMSQ1RU75g17GxrEN+QJbviLgiB6Db6+vfLO5SzGex Y7sGyow01fBa+uJuTGaSvAIbNtkqReF0opwHZxuAT7ovoPyjTwCK6EVnOzjHKHgX ujZcywWggHM= Original-Received: from pb-sasl1.nyi.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-sasl1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A617E784DD; Mon, 15 May 2017 15:55:21 -0400 (EDT) Original-Received: from clucks (unknown [88.160.190.192]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-sasl1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 9894E784DC; Mon, 15 May 2017 15:55:20 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: <871srv1866.fsf@dustycloud.org> (Christopher Allan Webber's message of "Thu, 11 May 2017 14:54:09 -0500") X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 6D63146E-39A8-11E7-8B20-9BB2D5707B88-02397024!pb-sasl1.pobox.com X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] [fuzzy] X-Received-From: 64.147.108.66 X-BeenThere: guile-user@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: General Guile related discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guile-user-bounces+guile-user=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "guile-user" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.lisp.guile.user:13717 gmane.lisp.guile.devel:19149 Archived-At: On Thu 11 May 2017 21:54, Christopher Allan Webber writes: >> Incidentally if you use Guile commercially and would like to support my >> work on it, let me know. > > I don't know what the right answer is to it (maybe eventually there > would be a company making money off of Guix deployment that can manage > to pay for full-time Guile work) but obviously this would be nice to see > happen. I think there's room for lots of organizations :) Commercially I see the value as being in niches that can apply technology from the Guile universe to problems people have. We can (and should!) spread the gospel of Scheme but that only gets you so far; my feeling is that successful guile-hacking orgs will have a touch with some market need beyond consultancy on Guile itself. In that regard too that niche relationship can exist in many different Guile-hacking orgs; a central "GuileCo" doesn't seem likely to me. Dunno tho :) I personally don't see the "finish line" of a full-time Guile gig in sight (yet?), so I am not going to put an extraordinary sprint of effort into that side of things right now; Guile is still a side gig for me at this point. It's one which I'd be happy to expand of course but not something on which to gamble the rent :) Happy hacking, Andy