On the Scala Center side; indeed we received this proposal in our first advisory board meeting to “ensure the continuity of Scala.js.” However, what precisely that means was never clearly defined (no proposal text was ever received.) Our first swing at trying to help the Scala.js ecosystem was to make it easier to use Scala.js with other ecosystems. @julienrf came up with the idea to try to make it easier to use Scala.js and NPM together, which was realized as the scalajs-bundler project. Other than that, it has been unclear what else we should do to help along Scala.js. Further, several of our advisory board members have made it clear that they think our time is better spent on other things that have a greater impact on the entire Scala community (regardless of backend), such as compiler profiling, the zinc incremental compiler, and help improving sbt. Since it was unclear what precisely we should do for Scala.js, and how much time we should invest (other accepted proposals name a duration that we should work on something), we’ve since followed the suggestion to move on to what appear to be more pressing issues, such improving tooling (sbt, scala meta, and code migration tools).
If you’re interested in some kind of commitment to permanently support Scala.js and to promote it, that’s beyond the scope of the Scala Center’s capabilities at the moment, financially. That said, I’d second what @SethTisue said about getting the word around to Lightbend business and sales folks. If what’s needed is some kind of signal or commitment to commercially support Scala.js, Lightbend would be the ones to eventually sell support contracts. And as @SethTisue indirectly said, the business/sales folks at Lightbend tend to drive some of Lightbend’s strategic decision-making, so if Scala.js is important to customers/potential customers of Lightbend, the first step is to communicate that to them. Given enough interest, perhaps Lightbend will one day consider commercially supporting Scala.js.