From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: (from majordomo@localhost) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) id JAA05118; Mon, 7 Oct 2002 09:12:28 +0200 (MET DST) X-Authentication-Warning: pauillac.inria.fr: majordomo set sender to owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr using -f Received: from nez-perce.inria.fr (nez-perce.inria.fr [192.93.2.78]) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) with ESMTP id JAA04936 for ; Mon, 7 Oct 2002 09:12:27 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from mel-rto3.wanadoo.fr (smtp-out-3.wanadoo.fr [193.252.19.233]) by nez-perce.inria.fr (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id g977CQD17451; Mon, 7 Oct 2002 09:12:26 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from mel-rta9.wanadoo.fr (193.252.19.69) by mel-rto3.wanadoo.fr (6.5.007) id 3D760D7C01250223; Mon, 7 Oct 2002 09:12:26 +0200 Received: from iliana (80.14.69.228) by mel-rta9.wanadoo.fr (6.5.007) id 3D80120400E7B4D5; Mon, 7 Oct 2002 09:12:26 +0200 Received: from luther by iliana with local (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) id 17ySDB-0000Lx-00; Mon, 07 Oct 2002 09:21:53 +0200 Date: Mon, 7 Oct 2002 09:21:53 +0200 To: Daniel de Rauglaudre Cc: caml-list@inria.fr Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Threats on future of Camlp4 Message-ID: <20021007072153.GA1326@iliana> References: <20021006205517.B19829@verdot.inria.fr> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20021006205517.B19829@verdot.inria.fr> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i From: Sven LUTHER Sender: owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr Precedence: bulk On Sun, Oct 06, 2002 at 08:55:26PM +0200, Daniel de Rauglaudre wrote: > Hi everybody, > > I am very sorry to announce here that the attitude of the direction of > the caml team is seriously comprimizing the future of Camlp4. I would > like you to send messages to stop that. Thank you if you can help. Daniel, the one problem i have with separating camlp4 from ocaml, is that, if i remember well, the standalone camlp4 needed access to the ocaml sources to build. As a debian maintainer of ocaml package if find this to be very messy, and was hapy when it was solved by including camlp4 in ocaml. If we separate again, what will be the situation on this same topic ? will you again depend on the ocaml source ? Is there not a cleaner solution for this ? And also i am curious, what is so difficult with continuing to release camlp4 as part of ocaml, but have a separate CVS tree for developpment, that you sync with ocaml from time to time (and probably before each new release), in the same way as DRI for example maintains a separate development tree from XFree86 ? Friendly, Sven Luther ------------------- To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr Archives: http://caml.inria.fr Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/ Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners