[slime-devel] Re: SLIME48: a Swank back end in Scheme48

[Taylor Campbell]

I was almost convinced earlier today not to fork SLIME, as everyone
who responded to my poll (about five or six people) was opposed to it,
and I didn't want the maintenance burden of a SLIME fork; I was about
to send mail to this regard a few minutes ago, until I received the
ChangeLog diff showing numerous changes to the SLIME48 code that were
made without my knowledge, that I was not sent or even contacted about
before they were committed, that were inconsiderate of Scheme &
Scheme48's style & design, that were committed even before I got CVS
access, and that were made without regard to the separate Darcs
repository that I was maintaining.  I was under the impression, too,
that the general attitude was that burden of SLIME48's maintenance
should *not* be placed on the existing SLIME maintainers.

I am sorry to those who would have preferred no fork, and I apologize
for the bother taken to put SLIME48 in SLIME's CVS, but under the
circumstances and in consideration of the possible advantages that
more freedom from the current SLIME development might allow, I'd
rather fork SLIME.

(I have been a bit busy these past couple weeks, which is why I
haven't been very quick to respond, and which is why I haven't made
many changes on my end to SLIME48 during this time.  This is not a
permanent status, however; I shall work on it more in the next few
days.)