From: Vasili Galchin <vasiliocaml@yahoo.com>
To: Matt Gushee <mgushee@havenrock.com>, caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr
Cc: vasiliocaml@yahoo.com
Subject: Re: OCaml's Cathedral & Bazaar (was Re: [Caml-list] Completeness of "Unix" run-time library)
Date: Fri, 19 Mar 2004 22:23:27 -0800 (PST) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20040320062327.79757.qmail@web41213.mail.yahoo.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20040318085638.GA11753@swordfish>
Matt,
Thank you! I was away for a bit. You are not being
grandiose at all. When I started the discussion about
"Unix completeness", I was tactfully (maybe not so
tactfully) asking why OCaml is not like Linux??!! Your
metaphor is exactly where I was going. I really want
to see to a functional language make it into the
mainstream (i.e. I have programmed in imperative
languages all of my 28 year career ... nothing has
changed). After looking at various FPL code bases, I
really believe taht OCaml has a shot assuming we all
take the challenge seriously (I have been in American
industry for 26 years ... which sadly is far too
pragmatic and conservative to change).
Regards, Vasili
--- Matt Gushee <mgushee@havenrock.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 17, 2004 at 04:19:05PM -0800, Vasili
> Galchin wrote:
>
> > > and so, those of us who have created bindings
> for
> > > other Posix functions
> > > should
> > > try to work with them to get our code merged.
> This
> > Eric, it sounds to me that you and I are on
> the
> > same page, i.e. in total agreement. What prompted
> my
> > posting is that I feel a tad frustrated when I
> read
> > code that I believe is very good (e.g. Georgi's
> ipv6
> > socket code where he split socket stuff out from
> > unix.ml by itself making readibility much better
> and
> > esaier multiple people to work and not having big
> > merge problems) and I hear about other code. In
> both
> > cases, these new code seems to have been sitting
> > around and not code reviewed and put into CVS,
> where
> > it should be. Also there is a danger of some
> > divergence because someone will use some of this
> > non-checked in code and it becomes defacto
> standard.
> > So, OCaml community, how do we move forward to get
> > this new processed and potentially merged into the
> > mainline.
>
> (Sorry about the grandiose title. I have nothing
> suitably profound to
> say ... just couldn't think of a better way to
> express the subject.)
>
> I wonder if it is possible to persuade INRIA to do
> anything.
>
> I have no inside information on the process at
> INRIA, but my impression
> from reading this list over the past year or so is:
>
> 1) The OCaml team at INRIA care about the
> community, but there are too
> few of them to meet all our needs, and I suppose
> their work is also
> subject to institutional pressures that we are
> only vaguely aware
> of. Maybe they are struggling to keep enough
> resources for OCaml
> work.
>
> 2) INRIA as an institution finds it convenient to
> release OCaml as open
> source, but doesn't really care about the
> community. They benignly
> neglect everything that doesn't relate to their
> research goals.
>
> 3) OCaml-as-project (i.e. I'm talking about how
> OCaml is developed, not
> what it is) is a fragile enterprise. E.g., one
> developer leaves, and
> the future of Camlp4 becomes uncertain. Not
> good.
>
> I'm not saying you should give up hope just yet, but
> maybe it's time to
> consider alternatives.
>
> What if there were an "OCaml Community Library
> Project"--a group outside
> INRIA that would take responsibility for extending
> and perhaps partially
> replacing the standard library--maybe a bit like the
> current ExtLib
> project, only more extensive (BTW, why are there two
> ExtLibs?? One of
> you change the name, please! Thank you.). Maybe if
> that project showed
> itself to be responsible, credible, reliable, etc.
> etc., after a while
> it could become the de facto standard library.
>
> The idealistic scenario is a division of labor
> wherein INRIA continues
> to develop the parts of OCaml that are interesting
> to them, while other
> parts (of more interest to those of us working to
> create practical
> and/or commercial software) would be taken over by
> the community.
>
> I can't say whether this idea is feasible, or
> whether INRIA would be
> willing to go along with it, but maybe it's
> something to consider.
>
> --
> Matt Gushee When a nation follows
> the Way,
> Englewood, Colorado, USA Horses bear manure
> through
> mgushee@havenrock.com its fields;
> http://www.havenrock.com/ When a nation ignores
> the Way,
> Horses bear soldiers
> through
> its streets.
>
> --Lao Tzu (Peter Merel,
> trans.)
>
> -------------------
> 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
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Finance Tax Center - File online. File on time.
http://taxes.yahoo.com/filing.html
-------------------
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
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-03-20 6:23 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 127+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-03-09 17:30 [Caml-list] Completeness of "Unix" run-time library Vasili Galchin
2004-03-09 17:55 ` Richard Jones
2004-03-09 18:11 ` Shawn Wagner
2004-03-15 19:44 ` Eric Stokes
2004-03-16 5:32 ` Vasili Galchin
2004-03-17 15:52 ` Eric Stokes
2004-03-18 0:19 ` Vasili Galchin
2004-03-18 8:56 ` OCaml's Cathedral & Bazaar (was Re: [Caml-list] Completeness of "Unix" run-time library) Matt Gushee
2004-03-18 10:31 ` Richard Jones
2004-03-18 11:22 ` Nicolas Cannasse
2004-03-18 11:18 ` Wolfgang Müller
2004-03-18 11:55 ` Diego Olivier Fernandez Pons
2004-03-18 12:42 ` Benjamin Geer
2004-03-18 14:12 ` Xavier Leroy
2004-03-18 17:18 ` Benjamin Geer
2004-03-18 17:56 ` Alex Baretta
2004-03-18 18:33 ` Markus Mottl
2004-03-19 10:58 ` [Caml-list] Structuring the Caml community Christophe TROESTLER
2004-03-19 18:29 ` Yamagata Yoriyuki
2004-03-18 23:44 ` [Caml-list] Structuring the Caml community (Re: OCaml's Cathedral & Bazaar) Alain.Frisch
2004-03-19 8:36 ` Oliver Bandel
2004-03-19 19:03 ` Eric Stokes
2004-03-19 22:34 ` Benjamin Geer
2004-03-19 22:58 ` Matthew O'Connor
2004-03-19 23:15 ` Eric Stokes
2004-03-19 23:23 ` Karl Zilles
2004-03-20 10:10 ` ocaml.org (was: Re: [Caml-list] Structuring the Caml community (Re: OCaml's Cathedral & Bazaar)) Richard Jones
[not found] ` <Pine.LNX.4.44.0403201143290.2678-100000@lcmpc4.epfl.ch>
2004-03-20 10:47 ` Richard Jones
2004-03-18 23:41 ` OCaml's Cathedral & Bazaar (was Re: [Caml-list] Completeness of "Unix" run-time library) Gerd Stolpmann
2004-03-19 0:47 ` Kenneth Knowles
2004-03-19 8:54 ` Richard Jones
2004-03-19 12:29 ` Gerd Stolpmann
2004-03-19 12:44 ` [Caml-list] Proposed community structure (was Re: OCaml's Cathedral & Bazaar) Benjamin Geer
2004-03-19 17:30 ` [Caml-list] " Gerd Stolpmann
2004-03-20 6:30 ` Matt Gushee
2004-03-20 6:49 ` Vasili Galchin
2004-03-20 13:19 ` Ville-Pertti Keinonen
2004-03-20 19:03 ` Vasili Galchin
2004-03-20 11:23 ` Benjamin Geer
2004-03-20 16:46 ` Gerd Stolpmann
2004-03-20 13:07 ` [Caml-list] Re: OCaml's Cathedral & Bazaar Dmitry Bely
2004-03-20 15:55 ` Gerd Stolpmann
2004-03-20 20:09 ` brogoff
2004-03-18 12:55 ` Alex Baretta
2004-03-19 8:54 ` OCaml's Cathedral & Bazaar (was Re: [Caml-list] Completeness of "Unix" run-time library) Sven Luther
2004-03-19 9:12 ` Sven Luther
2004-03-18 13:12 ` John Carr
2004-03-18 13:56 ` Richard Jones
2004-03-18 18:41 ` Oliver Bandel
2004-03-18 20:10 ` John Carr
2004-03-18 23:20 ` Richard Jones
2004-03-19 1:30 ` Jacques Garrigue
2004-03-19 5:10 ` skaller
2004-03-19 8:41 ` Sven Luther
2004-03-19 8:58 ` Richard Jones
2004-03-19 9:13 ` Sven Luther
2004-03-19 10:03 ` Alex Baretta
2004-03-19 10:17 ` Sven Luther
2004-03-19 11:49 ` Benjamin Geer
2004-03-19 12:20 ` Gerd Stolpmann
2004-03-19 12:31 ` Sven Luther
2004-03-19 12:34 ` Issac Trotts
2004-03-21 9:13 ` skaller
2004-03-21 20:05 ` Issac Trotts
[not found] ` <1079927683.3165.73.camel@pelican.wigram>
2004-03-22 6:51 ` Issac Trotts
2004-03-23 19:48 ` skaller
2004-03-23 22:16 ` Gerd Stolpmann
2004-04-03 6:36 ` Dustin Sallings
2004-04-03 7:43 ` Kenneth Knowles
2004-04-05 7:50 ` Dustin Sallings
2004-04-06 4:20 ` Vasili Galchin
2004-04-06 7:24 ` skaller
2004-04-06 17:24 ` Benjamin Geer
2004-04-06 17:38 ` Kip Macy
2004-04-07 23:11 ` Vasili Galchin
2004-04-07 23:08 ` Vasili Galchin
2004-04-07 23:31 ` Dustin Sallings
2004-04-08 13:57 ` John Goerzen
2004-04-13 11:15 ` Keith Wansbrough
2004-04-08 13:48 ` John Goerzen
2004-04-08 14:06 ` Richard Jones
2004-04-08 14:53 ` John Goerzen
2004-04-08 19:56 ` [Caml-list] Re: OCaml's Cathedral & Bazaar Christophe TROESTLER
2004-04-08 20:47 ` OCaml's Cathedral & Bazaar (was Re: [Caml-list] Completeness of "Unix" run-time library) Evan Martin
2004-04-08 21:20 ` Kenneth Knowles
2004-04-07 23:03 ` Vasili Galchin
2004-04-08 7:03 ` james woodyatt
2004-04-08 7:15 ` Stijn De Saeger
2004-04-08 8:25 ` skaller
2004-04-08 9:35 ` Andreas Rossberg
2004-04-08 11:05 ` Florian Hars
2004-04-08 11:31 ` Andreas Rossberg
2004-04-08 13:39 ` Jacques Garrigue
2004-04-08 12:33 ` Richard Jones
2004-03-19 12:17 ` Alex Baretta
2004-03-19 12:37 ` Sven Luther
2004-03-19 12:44 ` Issac Trotts
2004-03-18 23:31 ` Benjamin Geer
2004-03-19 1:08 ` Michael Vanier
2004-03-19 8:51 ` Sven Luther
2004-03-19 13:20 ` John Carr
2004-03-19 15:12 ` Sven Luther
2004-03-21 21:11 ` John Carr
2004-03-22 6:46 ` Sven Luther
2004-03-19 8:48 ` Sven Luther
2004-03-18 18:57 ` Shawn Wagner
2004-03-18 21:16 ` Kenneth Knowles
2004-03-18 22:32 ` Fernando Alegre
2004-03-19 0:03 ` [Caml-list] Re: OCaml's Cathedral & Bazaar Remi Vanicat
2004-03-19 8:50 ` [Caml-list] Demande clarification nomenclature ocaml* Diego Olivier Fernandez Pons
2004-03-19 9:49 ` [Caml-list] Suggestion (was: Demande clarification nomenclature ocaml*) Wolfgang Müller
2004-03-19 10:19 ` [Caml-list] Modules and namespaces Richard Jones
2004-03-19 10:42 ` Wolfgang Müller
2004-03-19 10:45 ` Sven Luther
2004-03-19 13:56 ` Fernando Alegre
2004-03-19 15:15 ` Sven Luther
2004-03-19 11:45 ` [Caml-list] Demande clarification nomenclature ocaml* Benjamin Geer
2004-03-20 6:12 ` OCaml's Cathedral & Bazaar (was Re: [Caml-list] Completeness of "Unix" run-time library) Matt Gushee
2004-03-20 11:29 ` Benjamin Geer
2004-03-20 6:23 ` Vasili Galchin
2004-03-20 6:23 ` Vasili Galchin [this message]
2004-03-09 17:59 ` [Caml-list] Completeness of "Unix" run-time library james woodyatt
2004-03-19 10:19 ` Sven Luther
2004-03-20 6:15 ` Vasili Galchin
2004-03-20 6:40 ` Sven Luther
2004-03-20 6:45 ` Vasili Galchin
2004-03-09 18:04 ` Stefano Zacchiroli
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20040320062327.79757.qmail@web41213.mail.yahoo.com \
--to=vasiliocaml@yahoo.com \
--cc=caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr \
--cc=mgushee@havenrock.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox