# Reviewers and maintainers needed for stdlib

**URL:** <https://fortran-lang.discourse.group/t/reviewers-and-maintainers-needed-for-stdlib/1506>\
**Category:** Meta\
**Created:** [July 3, 2021, 7:37pm UTC](https://fortran-lang.discourse.group/t/reviewers-and-maintainers-needed-for-stdlib/1506 "2021-07-03T19:37:12Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Showing post:** 21

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![certik](https://yyz2.discourse-cdn.com/free1/user_avatar/fortran-lang.discourse.group/certik/32/4_2.png) [@certik](https://fortran-lang.discourse.group/u/certik)\
**Post date:** [July 12, 2021, 5:57pm UTC](https://fortran-lang.discourse.group/t/reviewers-and-maintainers-needed-for-stdlib/1506/21 "2021-07-12T17:57:49Z")

</div>

I see. It seems the Fortran rewrite might be more difficult. So I think for now we should simply depend on `fypp` to be in PATH and `fpm` will call it automatically on `.fypp` files and take care of everything else, so you just do `fpm build` or `fpm test` and things will re-generate / recompile automatically under the hood.

In a separate issue we can brainstorm what it would take to rewrite into Fortran. I proposed this to our monthly Fortran call: [Fortran Monthly Call: July 2021 - #5 by certik](https://fortran-lang.discourse.group/t/fortran-monthly-call-july-2021/1510/5)

---

_[View the full topic](https://fortran-lang.discourse.group/t/reviewers-and-maintainers-needed-for-stdlib/1506)._