Thanks for pointing all this out. I honestly don't think of the Scala brand as being tied to the Play framework. Typesafe actually pushes Play on Java more than it does Play on Scala (even though we think Scala is better suited, obviously). We try to decouple Scala from Typesafe and our technologies in two ways: we provide Java programmers with an excellent experience on akka & play, and we welcome external maintainers for any part of Scala.
We happen to steward the Scala project and fund a lot of Scala core development (along with EPFL and research grants), but we're more than happy to share that responsibility with anyone who steps up, as has recently happened (baby steps) with the Scala modules that we spun out of the core for this reason.
PS: The only things that make me angrier than ant are jenkins and bash. (The build systems you're not angry with are probably the ones you haven't spent enough "quality" time with.) In any case, thanks for persevering with sbt and scala!
PPS: I don't think this is an odd route for a small company; how do you make money by developing just a programming language and nothing else?
We happen to steward the Scala project and fund a lot of Scala core development (along with EPFL and research grants), but we're more than happy to share that responsibility with anyone who steps up, as has recently happened (baby steps) with the Scala modules that we spun out of the core for this reason.
PS: The only things that make me angrier than ant are jenkins and bash. (The build systems you're not angry with are probably the ones you haven't spent enough "quality" time with.) In any case, thanks for persevering with sbt and scala!
PPS: I don't think this is an odd route for a small company; how do you make money by developing just a programming language and nothing else?