R7RS Initial Results of Implementor Intentions Poll

The following all intend to support R7RS small:
* Per Bothner (Kawa)
* Will Clinger (Larceny)
* Shiro Kawai (Gauche)
* Manuel Serrano (Bigloo) – “not sure about libraries”
* Alex Shinn (Chibi) – “already fully implemented, but lacking tests”
* Felix Winkelmann (Chicken)
The following were less committal, but open, and their
implementations are flexible enough to implement R7RS in
third-party code:
* Kent Dybvig (Chez) – “if it’s as simple as you say I don’t see why not”
* Matthew Flatt (Racket) – “if there’s sufficient user demand”
* Andy Wingo (Guile) – “probably”
The following are simply unable to implement R7RS or uninterested
in standards:
* Taylor Campbell (MIT) – “MIT lacks the infrastructure for modules”
* Jonathan Shapiro (TinyScheme) – thinks call/cc should be removed
* Jeffery Mark Siskind (Stalin) – “no longer working on Stalin”
* Michael Sperber (Scheme48) – “no time even for R6RS”
No one refused to implement based on the content of the standard,
or cited any features as showstoppers.

That last part is important; R6RS didn’t have that quality.
(via scheme-reports)