Hi!

> Hello!  I'm responsible for this one, and open to suggestions.
>
> That website was created as an easy place for me to collect knowledge
> about Pre-Scheme, and will soon act as a landing page for the new
> porting effort.  I'd like to maintain an independent project page, but
> am happy to collaborate.

Thanks for getting in touch. Good work! Information on PreScheme has
been hard to come by.

I made a bare-bones page at https://groups.scheme.org/prescheme/ earlier
but your site is much better. I'll delete that page if you add all the
info to your site.

Regarding the domains, I'd like to make https://pre.scheme.org/ redirect
to https://prescheme.org/, but we have certain customs about ownership.

To illustrate: Gerbil Scheme is owned by Dimitris Vyzovitis so he has
full control over https://gerbil.scheme.org/. But things that have no
clear owner have consensus-driven sites. For example, none of us own the
Scheme standards so https://standards.scheme.org/ is collectively owned.
People who want to add stuff about some aspect of the standards there
can add it.

It's my impression that PreScheme has no owner. If this is the case and
the site is presented under the scheme.org umbrella, it would have to
operate under similar principles: It should be a relatively neutral
presentation of all aspects of PreScheme.

For comparison, standards.scheme.org does not take sides in the R6RS and
R7RS debate and simply presents both standards in a neutral (or mildly
positive) light. A PreScheme site connected to Scheme.org should present
all the (current and historical) PreScheme implementations and working
groups in the same spirit, giving each group its own sub-site where they
can promote their vision but not favoring any group on the main site.

Despite the community-owned nature of most of Scheme.org, the
development of most sections is in fact led by one or two people. For
example, https://index.scheme.org/ is community-owned but Arvydas has
done almost everything and it would be rude for the rest of us to
override him.

This dynamic emerges naturally, and you would have the moral right to
lead the work on the PreScheme site. But in the case of disputes,
especially about favoritism, the principle behind the community sections
of Scheme.org is that consensus wins over the vision of a particular
group, and when there is no consensus, neutrality wins.

As for hosting, your current server is fine.

If this seems too bureaucratic or uncertain for your goals, I
understand. Scheme.org is geared toward achieving stability and trust in
10-20 years so our approach seems heavy-handed to many people now.

> Thanks for your efforts in bringing the communities together!

Thank you for doing the same around the Scheme48 legacy.

I noticed that you set up https://gitea.scheme.org/scsh-conservatory as
well. If you have any ideas for how to present it under the scheme.org
website, let us know. I didn't yet add anything about scsh under
https://conservatory.scheme.org/ because I couldn't immediately think of
a good layout. It's better if you decide how to do it.

> http://landoflisp.com/comic_20x_22.png

Indeed.