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 GAA11542; Fri, 19 Mar 2004 06:05:53 +0100 (MET) X-Authentication-Warning: pauillac.inria.fr: majordomo set sender to owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr using -f Received: from nez-perce.inria.fr (nez-perce.inria.fr [192.93.2.78]) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) with ESMTP id GAA11446 for ; Fri, 19 Mar 2004 06:05:49 +0100 (MET) Received: from smtp3.adl2.internode.on.net (smtp3.adl2.internode.on.net [203.16.214.203]) by nez-perce.inria.fr (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i2J56GKW019338 for ; Fri, 19 Mar 2004 06:06:17 +0100 Received: from [192.168.1.200] (ppp114-118.lns1.syd3.internode.on.net [150.101.114.118]) by smtp3.adl2.internode.on.net (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id i2J55aUK062584; Fri, 19 Mar 2004 15:35:41 +1030 (CST) Subject: Re: OCaml's Cathedral & Bazaar (was Re: [Caml-list] Completeness of "Unix" run-time library) From: skaller Reply-To: skaller@users.sourceforge.net To: Jacques Garrigue Cc: rich@annexia.org, caml-list In-Reply-To: <20040319103054F.garrigue@kurims.kyoto-u.ac.jp> References: <20040318184118.GC702@first.in-berlin.de> <200403182010.i2IKAK1a008157@nerd-xing.mit.edu> <20040318232039.GA1912@redhat.com> <20040319103054F.garrigue@kurims.kyoto-u.ac.jp> Content-Type: text/plain Message-Id: <1079673020.12190.26.camel@pelican.wigram> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.2.2 (1.2.2-4) Date: 19 Mar 2004 16:10:20 +1100 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Miltered: at nez-perce by Joe's j-chkmail ("http://j-chkmail.ensmp.fr")! X-Loop: caml-list@inria.fr X-Spam: no; 0.00; ocaml's:01 caml-list:01 run-time:01 sourceforge:01 2004:99 jacques:01 2004:99 bug:01 bug:01 laughing:01 accountant:99 laughing:01 accountant:99 9660:01 glebe:01 Sender: owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr Precedence: bulk X-Status: X-Keywords: X-UID: 194 On Fri, 2004-03-19 at 12:30, Jacques Garrigue wrote: > From: Richard Jones > > On Thu, Mar 18, 2004 at 03:10:20PM -0500, John Carr wrote: > > > Suppose we find a bug in ocaml that impacts our product. > > > Whose job is it to fix the bug? Neither "a network of > > > hackers" nor "some academic researchers in France, if they > > > have the time" is an acceptable answer. > > Well, I understand this is hard to explain to companies. > Yet I believe that we have a good record for correcting bugs. > It is not because we are academic researchers that we don't take > seriously our responsibilities. > (Microsoft is certainly not faster, and does not offer more guarantees.) Falls over laughing... no comparison! I found 3 bugs in Ocaml compiler. The first one took a while to convince the team there really was a bug .. several versions were unusable. But once convinced, the fix in one day. Two other bugs fixed in several hours. Experience with MS: a complex application using Borland C++ had to be converted to MS due to some moron accountant manager idiot. MSVC++ couldn't handle it due to both serious bugs and size limitations. Yes, the company was VERY BIG player with MS contract support and ISO quality assurance procedures (falls over laughing again) yes the MS representative was on site quickly enough to examine the problem. What did he do? Report the bug (which we already knew) to the MSVC++ compiler team in Redmond. That's it. Even the representative got no feedback from them, let alone a fix. AFAIK the problem was never fixed .. I didn't hang around long enough to find out the eventual outcome .. it seems doubtful the accountant got fired though :D -- John Skaller, mailto:skaller@users.sf.net voice: 061-2-9660-0850, snail: PO BOX 401 Glebe NSW 2037 Australia Checkout the Felix programming language http://felix.sf.net ------------------- 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