This page is not created by, affiliated with, or supported by Slack Technologies, Inc.
2022-12-09
Channels
- # adventofcode (93)
- # announcements (11)
- # babashka (7)
- # babashka-sci-dev (17)
- # beginners (73)
- # biff (7)
- # calva (3)
- # cider (1)
- # clj-kondo (160)
- # clj-together (12)
- # clojure (44)
- # clojure-art (2)
- # clojure-europe (12)
- # clojure-losangeles (1)
- # clojure-nl (3)
- # clojure-norway (22)
- # clojure-uk (2)
- # clojurescript (8)
- # clr (1)
- # cursive (6)
- # data-science (1)
- # datomic (1)
- # emacs (6)
- # events (1)
- # exercism (1)
- # fulcro (6)
- # graphql (2)
- # introduce-yourself (1)
- # lsp (18)
- # nrepl (7)
- # off-topic (45)
- # polylith (25)
- # portal (25)
- # practicalli (3)
- # re-frame (14)
- # reagent (28)
- # reitit (2)
- # releases (2)
- # shadow-cljs (73)
- # sql (11)
- # tools-deps (12)
- # transit (4)
- # xtdb (4)
https://www.clojuriststogether.org/news/q1-2023-funding-round-and-survey-results/
some broken markdown image refs there
Thanks, just fixed them
I found > • A body like Clojurists Together could be a trusted entity for taking over management of abandoned Clojure libraries. Particularly interesting 🙂
(under “What would you like to be different in the Clojure community in the next 12 months?“)
In so far that that’s the aim of clj-commons. So either: 1. clj-commons isn’t trusted 2. clj-commons doesn’t do a very good job of such management 3. clj-commons doesn’t do a very good job of publicizing what they do
My guess is 3 🙂
I’ve added a note to that line