From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail1-relais-roc.national.inria.fr (mail1-relais-roc.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.82]) by walapai.inria.fr (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id pB77NUk3011585 for ; Wed, 7 Dec 2011 08:23:32 +0100 X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AtYAAA4U307RVde2kGdsb2JhbABDqloIIgEBAQEJCQ0HFAQhgXIBAQEEEgIsARseAwwGBQs7IgERAQUBHAYnDqBxCotkgmuEND2IcQIFCosoBI0xhzWNbD2DeA X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.71,312,1320620400"; d="scan'208";a="134274648" Received: from mail-ey0-f182.google.com ([209.85.215.182]) by mail1-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr with ESMTP/TLS/RC4-SHA; 07 Dec 2011 08:23:32 +0100 Received: by eaai12 with SMTP id i12so298929eaa.27 for ; Tue, 06 Dec 2011 23:23:32 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; bh=DT6/ajCU8MYD3ejZTQ1tzytkyxZmx77VdNo6uCwA4nU=; b=w7Hifd4WFkLfMayUQ52f2nTAB4Y7vncWjEDDxK6pP8S9vbC+FD9UJ3kWdHHACUdXIN 8Z5BDDdGBmxHyqBtoTJNQdzj0YNopcKFszWG+tOsUBFfAHzFRCuQgFJGaTt0ma3VV11R iNZCIhFCWCk5KNoMXlI39AE2/c7BQTK6gTzd4= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.213.35.13 with SMTP id n13mr3182440ebd.4.1323242611972; Tue, 06 Dec 2011 23:23:31 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.213.114.83 with HTTP; Tue, 6 Dec 2011 23:23:31 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <20111206224836.GB2039@siouxsie> References: <1B0D83BD-1902-4F7C-B3FB-B759122D6AB9@googlemail.com> <20111206224836.GB2039@siouxsie> Date: Wed, 7 Dec 2011 08:23:31 +0100 Message-ID: From: Adrien To: caml users Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Subject: Re: [Caml-list] OCaml maintenance status / community fork Hi, My only complaint about the current development model is that it is a bit opaque and we don't really know what is happening; we mostly only see the result once it has been done. I'd like to know some things like: this feature/patch (will/will not/might/might not) go in/will be tried/we have no idea/... Maybe a preliminary opinion from the guts but at least some signal because it's impossible to see a difference between something that hasn't been looked at yet and something that is being silently rejected. This would also make the core development seem more active (and considering the major changes we've seen with each major release in the past years, it definitely is). Regards, Adrien Nader