Email list hosting service & mailing list manager

Scheme Review Lassi Kortela (23 Nov 2022 18:16 UTC)
Re: Scheme Review Jakub T. Jankiewicz (23 Nov 2022 20:14 UTC)
Re: Scheme Review Lassi Kortela (24 Nov 2022 07:39 UTC)
Re: Scheme Review Retropikzel (25 Nov 2022 09:53 UTC)
Re: Scheme Review Lassi Kortela (27 Nov 2022 07:15 UTC)

Re: Scheme Review Retropikzel 25 Nov 2022 09:53 UTC

On Thu, 24 Nov 2022 09:39:10 +0200
Lassi Kortela <xxxxxx@lassi.io> wrote:

> > I'm not exactly sure how it would look like but I'm all in to have
> > other people send some interesting code they wrote that you can
> > test and comment. I would love to see different experiments written
> > in Scheme that do something cool in Scheme. I don't code much
> > scheme recently this would motivate me to write more.

I would also love to send some ideas for other people to discuss and
even more I would like to read and learn from others people code and
discussion. I think with time and good archiving it can become very
valuable resource of knowledge.

>
> Great!
>
> > With my limited experience with latest SRFI I'm not that exited
> > and motivate to write code.
>
> SRFI works best to discuss relatively finished proposals. People who
> try to use it for new ideas are often disappointed.
>
> > The problem with SFRI is that they are a bit like islands one
> > person write one and other comment. Also it's hard to follow
> > discussion. If you see how JavaScript TC39 do it's proposals
> > everything is public on GitHub you don't need to subscribe to each
> > SRFI via mailing list ot see discussion and it's hard to actually
> > participate in the process that is basically created by one person.
> > It would be great if you have something like experiments where
> > someone show cool thing written in Scheme some new syntax or
> > something and people can comment.
>
> Many SRFIs have more than one author. But it's true that only the
> authors and the editor (Arthur) can directly make changes.
>
> If commenters can modify the code or document being reviewed, that
> sounds more like a wiki than a code review.
>
> I looked at JavaScript TC39 and ReactJS RFCs. They look like SRFI in
> the sense that one author (or a few authors) writes a proposal and
> others comment.
>
> https://github.com/pre-srfi is entirely on GitHub. But it didn't
> generate as much interest as SRFI. My guess is that a significant
> factor is we did not publish drafts. The work disappears into the Git
> commits and GitHub issues. A new draft gives a sense of
> accomplishment and reminds people to look.
>
> srfi-auto-subscribe (at
> https://srfi.schemers.org/srfi-list-subscribe.html) subscribes you
> automatically to all new SRFIs' mailing lists.
>
> > So it will be more like RFC (Request for Comments), this is how
> > ReactJS library from Facebook is proposing new features. They write
> > proposal on GitHub as issue and other people comment. It need to be
> > something where you can easy participate. I think that most
> > developers have GitHub account so using GitHub for this is good
> > idea.
> >
> > But it can be a website. But what I would like to have is RSS feed
> > of the RFC and comments system based on GitHub. There are nice two
> > OSS project that use issues and discussion on the repo as comments
> > in different pages. So whole thing doesn't require a server.
> > Creating RFC can be added as PR to repo (clear instruction need to
> > be added to website that explain how to add one)
> >
> > Those are two systems:
> > https://github.com/giscus/giscus
> > https://github.com/utterance/utterances
> >
> > I like better giscus becasue you can use issues for different
> > purpose.
>
> RSS feed is a good idea, standard and well established.
>
> Giscus and Utterances are a clever idea. OTOH a lot of good
> programmers are starting to move away from GitHub since Microsoft
> started adding Copilot and other stuff.

Personally I would be glad if github was not the platform for this,
in addition to not being open source there are social media elements
and other features I dislike.

Could codeberg (https://codeberg.org) be suitable? It uses gitea
(https://gitea.io/en-us/) underneath and should have similar features
to github regarding discussed use case.

I do agree tho, that something "easier" than mailing list would lower
the barrier of entry. For example I have been programming for over 15
years and consider myself quite a nerd but this is, I think, my second
or third time sending anything to mailing lists. Mostly I'm worried I
mess something up. Nice GUI would solve this "fear". :)

>
> Let's wait for opinions from more people before we decide the
> platform.

Just throwing out one idea that came to mind.

I am very envious of clojuredocs (https://clojuredocs.org/). It works
by having index of all the Clojure core functions etc. and allowing
people
to post their own examples of it. If there was place to discuss scheme
code
and ideas. Maybe in the future it could be expanded to have all the rNrs
procedures
so people could show their own examples. This would be very handy for
newcomers
to read.