Re: The OCaml Community (aka back from the Developer Days)

[Sylvain Le Gall <sylvain@le-gall.net>]

Hello,

On 28-01-2008, Romain Beauxis <toots@rastageeks.org> wrote:
> Le Monday 28 January 2008 15:42:15 Sylvain Le Gall, vous avez écrit :
>> On 28-01-2008, Romain Beauxis <toots@rastageeks.org> wrote:
>> > Le Sunday 27 January 2008 14:09:22 David Teller, vous avez écrit :
>> >
>> > Another question is who will provide machines and means to acheive it.
>> > In particular, a repository à la CPAN for modules would be a great thing,
>> > but it would have to be supported by some structure...
>>
>> Indeed, you miss one point: my company will provide resource, if needed
>> for it.
>>
>> For now, the computer is hired (OVH SuperPlan 08) but i don't have
>> enough time to set it up.
>>
>> I only plan to provide a GForge/planets/SCM repository for now. But in
>> the future, if anything else is required, i will be able to provide more
>> things to it.
>
> Wouldn't it be better to define a real structure where your company and others 
> may take part ?
>
> For instance, kernel.org is run by a non-profit organisation, see: 
> http://www.kernel.org/nonprofit.html
>
> The fact is that, if we don't setup strong and clear definitions of who's in 
> charge of what or don't define a common head for the community, what will 
> happen if any of the involved company/hacker/.... decide to split and 
> continue alone, or simply to shutdown one machine, or claim copyright, etc...
>
> Again, I don't suspect any bad intention, but this is the only way to prevent 
> them, isn't it ?
>

I think we should great an "association loi 1901". I was thinking of
doing so... 

But you should know that most of the time 

<quote>
> company/hacker/....  decide to split and 
> continue alone, or simply to shutdown one machine, or claim copyright,
> etc...
</quote>

happens also with an organization. This kind of organization needs
manpower which are really provided by one or two people. This kind of
things dies as soon as only one of them decide to leave...

In other words, having an organization that defines who is in charge
won't provide stability or prevent people from doing stupid thing ;-)

Regards,
Sylvain Le Gall