From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.3 (2006-06-01) on yquem.inria.fr X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.4 required=5.0 tests=AWL,DATE_IN_PAST_06_12 autolearn=disabled version=3.1.3 Received: from discorde.inria.fr (discorde.inria.fr [192.93.2.38]) by yquem.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id BDC16BC69 for ; Sun, 5 Aug 2007 13:19:47 +0200 (CEST) Received: from ptb-relay02.plus.net (ptb-relay02.plus.net [212.159.14.213]) by discorde.inria.fr (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id l75BJleL013185 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Sun, 5 Aug 2007 13:19:47 +0200 Received: from [80.229.56.224] (helo=beast.local) by ptb-relay02.plus.net with esmtp (Exim) id 1IHe9C-0000II-Qw for caml-list@inria.fr; Sun, 05 Aug 2007 12:19:46 +0100 From: Jon Harrop Organization: Flying Frog Consultancy Ltd. To: caml-list@inria.fr Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Sorted list Date: Sun, 5 Aug 2007 02:47:33 +0100 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.7 References: <46B4485B.7040406@menta.net> <1186242141.11801.10.camel@rosella.wigram> <20070804173517.GA24131@jiyu.gnu> In-Reply-To: <20070804173517.GA24131@jiyu.gnu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200708050247.34512.jon@ffconsultancy.com> X-Miltered: at discorde with ID 46B5B253.000 by Joe's j-chkmail (http://j-chkmail . ensmp . fr)! X-Spam: no; 0.00; ocaml:01 ocaml:01 inria's:01 iterative:01 testament:98 vested:98 frog:98 wrote:01 caml-list:01 languages:03 programming:03 let:03 fork:05 inria:06 cancer:92 On Saturday 04 August 2007 18:35:17 Julien Moutinho wrote: > I am quite half-hearted about the idea of an Inrians' veto, > despite the fact that, they sure know how to select. > However if this could allow extra-Inrians to actually contribute to > (and learn) the jewelery, in a more _visible_ and _fast_ way, > which is _hardly_ the case currently, why not! Let us be pragmatic. > That said... do they have enough manpower for such a peer-review task? I think it is vitally important to note that the purpose of the team at INRIA is to perform research related to programming languages. The fact that the culmination of their research has been adopted worldwide by serious users for applications ranging from CPU verification to cancer research is a testament to the enormous practical value of their work. However, they are in no way obliged to persue OCaml beyond research. To the best of my knowledge, research on OCaml is slowing. However, the rate of adoption of OCaml is increasing. So I agree that something must be done, but making statements about INRIA's alleged "responsibility" will go nowhere fast. I believe we are all free to fork OCaml, create a new open source project and begin our own iterative improvements to it. I would like to see some of the industrial players with significant vested financial interests in OCaml collaborate in making or funding these improvements. -- Dr Jon D Harrop, Flying Frog Consultancy Ltd. OCaml for Scientists http://www.ffconsultancy.com/products/ocaml_for_scientists/?e