[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
who will be there
This group has no policy on either membership or voting; should it?
Membership on rrrs-authors currently depends on being nominated by
someone already on the list. Is being on rrrs-authors the same as being
invited to the June meeting?
The meeting is apparently not open to the public -- we haven't announced
it on the scheme@mc list. In fact, the membership of scheme@mc isn't
even aware of the existence of rrrs-authors or the imminence of the
meeting. It seems like a good idea to restrict attendance somewhat, but
are we going overboard in being so exclusive? I don't necessarily want
to answer yes, I just want to say that I can't remember these questions
ever having been discussed.
I would like to encourage Julian Padget or any of the other Eulisp
designers to come.
Here is my current list of people who have told me they plan to
David Bartley (will probably miss Saturday)
G J Sussman
I assume that the following people will be there, although I can't
recall having received definite word from them (I forget such things):
The following people participated in the debate over the date, although
they haven't confirmed that they'll attend:
Dan Friedman won't be able to attend.
Among the authors of the R^nRS's (n = 0,1,2,3) this leaves the
following people unaccounted for:
I don't think there's any burning need at this point to inform me of
your plans one way or the other, since the dates have been set and the
room has been reserved. If you show up you show up.
What time should we start in the morning? I have reserved the room for
9 to 5, but most of us are either night people or will be jet-lagging,
so would 10 be better?