The sequence of Stieltjes-constants diverges and thus cannot be summed conventionally. However their signs oscillate (unfortunately non-periodic) and thus I tried Euler- and a version of Noerlund-summation but could not arrive at a convincing result (a first impression is that S is in the near of 0.5, but the partial sums oscillate with any parameter that I can choose).
Q1: what is a meaningful value for the divergent sum $S$ of the Stieltjes-constants?
[update] Meanwhile I worked on the hints from wikipedia concerning the integral in the Borel-summation and could well make my question 2 more precise
I'm trying to make something from the defining exponential generating function for the Stieltjes-constants $$ \zeta(1+z) - {1 \over z} = \sum_{k=0}^\infty (-1)^k { s_k \over k! } z^k \tag1$$ or better with reversed sign of the argument z: $$ \zeta(1-z) + {1 \over z} = \sum_{k=0}^\infty { s_k \over k! } z^k \tag{1.1} $$
because the rhs looks like the inner term in the Borel-summation-method for the Stieltjes-constant, where the integral-term was cancelled. So we might, with wikipedia, say, that $ \zeta(1-z)+{1 \over z}$ is the Borel-transform of my wished sum $ S = \sum_{k=0}^\infty s_k $
So I think, that the correct Borel-sum computation using that $\zeta$-expression is by
$$ S = \int_0^\infty \exp(-t) (\zeta(1-tz)+{1\over tz}) dt | _{z=1} \tag2 $$
Feeding this into Pari/GP the integral seems to diverge; we can go to 12 or 13 for the upper bound of the integral to arrive at about S~0.499074922658 but increasing that upper bound further then the numerical integration "begins to diverge" (I got the same value using another method for summation, but again only as partial sum, after which the summation-procedure "begins to diverge") So this would indicate, that the Borel-summation is not sufficient for this, but possibly the value 0.499074... is a legitimate approximation.
It seems, that the alternating sum $A$ can much easier be evaluated to $$ A = \sum_{k=0}^\infty (-1)^k s_k \overset{ \text{ Eulersum}}{=}0.639... \tag3 $$ but this seems not to help yet for the evaluation of the non-alternating series...
Q2: Is formula (2) the correct Borel-summation for the sum S ?
Q2.1: can formula (2) be improved to make the Borel-summation converge?
(I remember that K.Knopp in his monography on series mentioned "iterated Borel-summation" but have no idea how to introduce this here)
[/update]