On Dec 8, 2011, at 10:54 , Alain Frisch wrote: > On 12/08/2011 10:10 AM, Benedikt Meurer wrote: >> There were already a few useful comments on the topic, but no statement from >> the current INRIA officials. Opening up the development of OCaml is a great >> suggestion, for example. Personally I'd even suggest to disconnect OCaml and >> INRIA, with an independent team of core maintainers (with appropriate spare >> time and knowledge). INRIA would still contribute to OCaml, but no longer >> control OCaml. > > Honestly, opening up the development of OCaml would be terrific; but trying > to disconnect it from INRIA sounds like a very bad idea to me. > > Concerning the issues with the ARM port, there is no chance to get a good > support for this architecture (which includes accepting patches) without > someone in the core team who feels responsible for the port and commits to > maintaining it. You might want to create a new "core team" completely > disconnected from INRIA, but the problem would remain the same (I don't > believe in a completely decentralized development model for something like > OCaml).
The problem is IMHO that there is no one at INRIA caring about ARM. In an open model we would have maintainers for the ARM port(s). > Instead, I'd suggest contacting the existing core team (c...@inria.fr) in > order to find a solution. I wasn't aware that there is a separate communication channel for the core team. I was under the impression that the caml-list was the best way to reach both the core team and the community. > Best regards, > Alain greets, Benedikt -- Caml-list mailing list. Subscription management and archives: https://sympa-roc.inria.fr/wws/info/caml-list Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs
