Existing OS APIs in Scheme implementations
Lassi Kortela
(09 May 2019 15:44 UTC)
|
Re: Existing OS APIs in Scheme implementations
Lassi Kortela
(09 May 2019 15:59 UTC)
|
Re: Existing OS APIs in Scheme implementations
John Cowan
(09 May 2019 23:49 UTC)
|
Re: Existing OS APIs in Scheme implementations
Lassi Kortela
(11 May 2019 12:52 UTC)
|
Re: Existing OS APIs in Scheme implementations
John Cowan
(11 May 2019 18:34 UTC)
|
Re: Existing OS APIs in Scheme implementations Lassi Kortela (11 May 2019 19:28 UTC)
|
Re: Existing OS APIs in Scheme implementations
John Cowan
(11 May 2019 20:32 UTC)
|
Re: Existing OS APIs in Scheme implementations Lassi Kortela 11 May 2019 19:27 UTC
> The BitBucket repo that I've been referring to began life as WG1's Trac > wiki, but when we lost that it was easier to convert it to a repo than a > BitBucket wiki (Mercurial repos are much more portable). I'm perfectly > happy to give write access to whomever wants it (currently just me and > Art Gleckler). I really don't want to see yet another location for this > work. Fair enough. Do you mean that instead of a wiki we would do mercurial commits to the repo? (Does BitBucket have a built-in wiki, and if so, is it any good or would you rather just stick to version control commits from the get-go?) I can have write access, or if BitBucket has an equivalent to pull requests, I can submit those. My handle there is @lassi.