Well, the dedication is gone. I even went to the trouble of removing the commit that added it (git rebase -i is your friend if you ever need to do this). But then I merged with Harold's repo and it came right back, because DVCSes can't tell the difference between deleted content and nonexistent content, and can't even give you a merge warning about it. So I flushed the actual text out again, but removing it from the history again probably won't work. In any case, the PR is now mergeable.

I wonder who the other Olin Shivers was, and whether he's related? WP lists a handful of Shiverses; I've only heard of the author Louise Shivers.

On Tue, Jun 23, 2020 at 8:51 PM Arthur A. Gleckler <xxxxxx@speechcode.com> wrote:

On Tue, Jun 23, 2020 at 5:02 PM John Cowan <xxxxxx@ccil.org> wrote:
I let myself be misled by your commit comment a3ed81adc6e1bd7ba1b70334a467f9c9e8a26193 in SRFI 198, "Ave Olin" ("Hello/Goodbye, Olin") into thinking he was dead, so I googled for ["Olin Shivers" death] and found <https://www.findagrave.com/memorial/95333577/olin-shivers>. Of course I should have realized those dates made no sense.

It wouldn't be the first time I had confused someone with my Latin. I was using it in the sense of ave imperator — "Hail, emperor!" — but without the morituri te salutant, I hope.

This is the kind of thing that Olin might enjoy as a prank, but I don't want to have to explain it to him or anyone else for years, so would you please take it out? A hearty acknowledgment will do.

I think SRFI 170 and SRFI 198 are okay now.

To be specific, you're saying that I should merge all pull requests and announce last call for both?

Once the note about Olin is removed/updated, that is.

Oh, and Github is reporting a merge conflict in the SRFI 170 document. I merged Harold's pull request after I merged the first part of yours, and the second part of yours conflicts. Would you please take a look?

Thanks.