Re: dpANSI

[Adam Warner <lists@consulting.net.nz>]

On Wed, 2004-06-23 at 03:56, Camm Maguire wrote:

> It would be nice for those in the know/responsible for Debian's legal
> understanding to put forth a consensus on this.  Others have suggested
> the possible usefulness of contacting others on the committee.  I have
> a call into one such person.  But given this statement, this course
> might be a waste of time.  Thoughts?

Contacting the committee will be worthwhile. The parties involved aren't
getting any younger and subsequent owners or estates could be
intransigent or litigious.

It would be great if this could be an agenda item for the next Committee
meeting (assuming one will be constituted to discuss this). Please let
me know the outcome of the contact you have made.

It's unlikely your contact will be a waste of time. Further statements
on the legal status of the dpANS draft documents from Committee members
will be valuable. They should also appreciate the benefits to Common
Lisp adoption of being able to annotate the standard with
clarifications, community interpretations and implementation specific
details. It is also important to have a solid foundation to build a
future standard upon. It is highly unlikely a future Common Lisp will be
the product of such a rigorous and formal process. But being able to
build upon the drafts to the world's best language specification will be
a good start.

Regards,
Adam