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 NAA10289; Fri, 19 Mar 2004 13:44:18 +0100 (MET) X-Authentication-Warning: pauillac.inria.fr: majordomo set sender to owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr using -f Received: from concorde.inria.fr (concorde.inria.fr [192.93.2.39]) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) with ESMTP id NAA10589 for ; Fri, 19 Mar 2004 13:44:17 +0100 (MET) Received: from rabelais.socialtools.net (rabelais.socialtools.net [81.2.94.243]) by concorde.inria.fr (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i2JCiGHd030734 for ; Fri, 19 Mar 2004 13:44:16 +0100 Received: by rabelais.socialtools.net (Postfix, from userid 108) id 277FD232FD; Fri, 19 Mar 2004 12:44:16 +0000 (GMT) Received: from socialtools.net (chaucer.socialtools.net [81.2.94.242]) by rabelais.socialtools.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9705A232DA; Fri, 19 Mar 2004 12:44:13 +0000 (GMT) Message-ID: <405AEB1D.6040109@socialtools.net> Date: Fri, 19 Mar 2004 12:44:13 +0000 From: Benjamin Geer User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.6) Gecko/20040113 X-Accept-Language: en-gb, en, fr, it MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Gerd Stolpmann Cc: caml-list@inria.fr Subject: [Caml-list] Proposed community structure (was Re: OCaml's Cathedral & Bazaar) References: <4059994E.2010802@socialtools.net> <20040318151234.B21768@pauillac.inria.fr> <1079653304.990.89.camel@ice.gerd-stolpmann.de> In-Reply-To: <1079653304.990.89.camel@ice.gerd-stolpmann.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63 (2004-01-11) on rabelais.socialtools.net X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-4.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham version=2.63 X-Miltered: at concorde by Joe's j-chkmail ("http://j-chkmail.ensmp.fr")! X-Loop: caml-list@inria.fr X-Spam: no; 0.00; ocaml's:01 gerd:01 stolpmann:01 owners:99 owners:99 reviews:99 python's:01 peps:01 caml:01 patch:02 modules:02 owner:97 owner:97 patches:02 module:03 Sender: owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr Precedence: bulk X-Keywords: X-UID: 229 Gerd Stolpmann wrote: > In order to reach this goal, a number of questions should be answered > (best as some kind of community process): > > - How can people participate (add packages, fix bugs, improve the base > software)? > > - How can the quality be ensured? > > - How are decisions made? > > - How can the platform be kept open? How about a structure like this: * A GCC-like steering committee composed of very experienced, respected Caml developers, who would be responsible for setting overall policy and resolving conflicts in the community. * Mozilla-like module owners, designated by the steering committee. Module owners would review and accept patches for their modules after public discussion. * Rotating GCC-like release managers, also chosen by the steering committee. The release managers would be responsible for coordinating regular releases and determining when each release was ready. People could participate by posting proposals to a mailing list; discussion would ensue, and the relevant module owner would be expected to accept or reject the proposal within a reasonable amount of time, taking into account the consensus on the list. A Mozilla-like review process could be used: the author submits a patch, the module owner reviews it and requests changes, and they iterate until the module owner is satisfied. For major enhancements, a more formal, detailed proposal format could be used, like Python's PEPs. If INRIA was willing, such a structure could also take over development of the standard libraries. Ben ------------------- 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