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

Thanks, I'm glad it's useful.

> 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.

It seems the main things missing are the SPS implementation and the
MITRE/VLISP papers, happy to add those to the site, I'll do that soon.

> 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.

I understand and agree in principle.  In the case of Pre-Scheme (as with
Scheme), there's a long history and academic legacy which is important
to preserve accurately and respectfully, and that's been my intent from
the beginning.

As for the future, I've secured a grant from NLnet to work on
"resurrecting" the Pre-Scheme compiler, porting it from Scheme 48 to
R7RS and extending/revising the language with the objective of realizing
its potential as a modern low-level functional/systems language.  This
will result in a good deal of new documentation focused specifically on
the port, with a re-organization of the landing page to highlight
progress updates and funnel newcomers towards a "getting started" guide.
  This would demote the historical information to a smaller call-out,
moving the bulk of that content to a separate page.

My concern is how best to balance the requirements of promoting my work
under the grant, while also presenting a neutral view of other
implementations which are currently all historical.  If this change in
focus would come across as unfairly biased, it might be better to keep a
separate page on scheme.org.  I'd be happy to move the historical
information to that page and link to it as the authoritative source for
Pre-Scheme as a whole.

>> 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.

It would make sense to have an SCSH page with an overview of its history
and a list of references/projects as we've done for Pre-Scheme.  There
are some really cool projects in that collection, particularly SUnet,
Commander S, and the CSAN.