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

[Luke Gorrie]

Taylor Campbell <campbell at mumble.net> writes:

> 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.

SLIME developers are obviously allowed to hack the code in SLIME CVS.
They do not need your permission.

Good luck with your fork.