Updating the WG2 Wiki

[Peter McGoron]

The previous WG2 meeting had some impromptu discussion about the
process. Some people were confused about the organization of the
R7RS-Large process, about the division of the Foundations, and the
assignment of topics to Fascicles.

I have updated the front page of the wiki
<https://codeberg.org/scheme/r7rs/wiki/Home> with more information about
the division and progress of the R7RS-Large. A lot of this information
was scattered around the repo without any links, so I hope by bringing
it to the front page people can have a good idea of what's going on and
where things are headed.

I have also written up some ideas about how to better organize meetings
and delegate responsibility here
<https://codeberg.org/scheme/r7rs/wiki/phm-Process-Organization-Proposal>
Comments welcomed.

-- Peter McGoron

[Alaric Snell-Pym]

On 10/03/2026 00:31, 'Peter McGoron' via scheme-reports-wg2 wrote:
> The previous WG2 meeting had some impromptu discussion about the
> process. Some people were confused about the organization of the R7RS-
> Large process, about the division of the Foundations, and the assignment
> of topics to Fascicles.
>
> I have updated the front page of the wiki <https://codeberg.org/scheme/
> r7rs/wiki/Home> with more information about the division and progress of
> the R7RS-Large. A lot of this information was scattered around the repo
> without any links, so I hope by bringing it to the front page people can
> have a good idea of what's going on and where things are headed.

Fantastic! I've long said the success of a wiki depends on there being
somebody who keeps the front page relevant :-)

> I have also written up some ideas about how to better organize meetings
> and delegate responsibility here <https://codeberg.org/scheme/r7rs/wiki/
> phm-Process-Organization-Proposal> Comments welcomed.

I had a similar thought to your proposed initial committees - that we
basically have a pipeline:

1. The community raises issues (or emails us and we raise issues on
their behalf)
2. There's some discussion around the issue and categorisation and so
on, ideally to encourage interested parties to elaborate and add their
thoughts
3. It gets allocated to a meeting (currently we're going through the
facsicles but I imagine at the end of Foundations we'll need to come
back and go over things that have arisen in each to finish them off)
4. We talk about it, and vote, which should be minuted AND then recorded
in the ticket (linking back to the minutes)
5. (potentially some time later, to allow related issues to be resolved)
it's written into the specification

...and your committees basically carve up the two blocks of
out-of-meetings work in steps 1-2 and 5.

>
> -- Peter McGoron
>

Thanks,

--
Alaric Snell-Pym (M0KTN neé M7KIT)
http://www.snell-pym.org.uk/alaric/