On Fri, Nov 8, 2019 at 1:52 PM Aleix Conchillo Flaqué <[email protected]> wrote:
If at some point I decide to switch to the MIT license > Dual licensing is also a possibility, so that users who prefer the GPLv3 license would still have it. > I assume the projects that currently use guile-json would still be able to > use it (probably renamed to some SRFI number) > In R6RS and R7RS systems, the same library can appear under two different names very easily. > Of course they would need to be ported, which would probably be a bit > painful if the SRFI API diverges too much from guile-json. > One thing that attracted me to guile-json is that it provides both a parser and a printer, and has very few dependencies and those are of a portable sort. Furthermore, its internal representation of JSON does not have any corner cases except using #nil (which is not portable off Guile) instead of 'null, something that is trivially changeable. > I'm also surprised there hasn't been any other Scheme implementations that > hasn't made an SRFI for JSON, I'm sure all of them have their own > implementations. May be SRFIs are not a huge priority? > It's not surprising that most Scheme implementers are considered with their Scheme rather than all of Scheme. Improving the state of the art for all of Scheme, however, is my particular task. As such, I will beg or borrow (but not steal) whatever I can. > So, for now, I think I will keep things as is unless the Guile community > and guile-json users tell me to switch or do something different. > Understood. You can disregard the issue that I filed at Github. John Cowan http://vrici.lojban.org/~cowan [email protected] With techies, I've generally found If your arguments lose the first round Make it rhyme, make it scan / Then you generally can Make the same stupid point seem profound! --Jonathan Robie
