[plt-scheme] Questions on PLT status and project structure

I guess I'm noticing that PLT doesn't have exactly the same structure as
some other popular open source projects. These other project structures
encourage community participation (from qualified community members
in different realms) in the PLT project offering it a longevity beyond the
activities of the core group.

Just for example, I was discouraged to learn that Alice-SML, a very nice
implementation of the dialect, activity has essentially ground to a halt 
- in
part a by product of failing to build an active dev an user community around
Alice-SML.

I'd hate to see the same happen the PLT, especially has I plan to use it for
a reasonably large and complex projects.

I  have never been a "high ceremony"  guy, but I can imagine partitioning
subsystems and assigning responsibility outside of the core group: 
Documentation,
Kernel/Compiler/GC/RTS documentation, SRFI maintenance, typed-scheme / 
scheme
integration, porting, core language evolution (immutable cons cells, 
lazy expressions
or whatever) and so forth and so on.  Here we can maintain and publish a 
simple
"Core PLT scheme language roadmap."

Similarly for Plant - there might be a relatively informal but still 
named group of
block-and-tackle application implementation folks who try to structure 
Planet, isolate
the glaring holes in the libraries and encourage development in these 
areas.  Again,
here, the core group can publish a core "Planet Development Roadmap."

Yada, yada, yada.

I don't mean to propose anything radical hear. Just setting the 
docs/environment up
for greater community participation in the language and libraries 
development - bringing
it in line with the structure of many other open source projects, 
several much larger
than the PLT project.

Scott

Geoffrey S. Knauth wrote:
> On Oct 14, 2009, at 07:19, Jay McCarthy wrote:
>
>> Speaking for myself, I can't think of anything that would make me give
>> up on PLT. I would guess that most would say the same.
>
> PLT is the most interesting continuously operating and improving and 
> energetic project and community I've encountered in years.  
> Signal-to-noise is very high.  I suppose I'll have to stop using it 
> when I'm dead, but it may very well keep me alive longer.  It 
> certainly feeds my brain.
>
>
>