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 RAA14045; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 17:44:23 +0200 (MET DST) 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 RAA13642 for ; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 17:44:22 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from lachesis.inria.fr (lachesis.inria.fr [128.93.52.5]) by concorde.inria.fr (8.11.1/8.10.0) with ESMTP id f9PFiAr08392; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 17:44:10 +0200 (MET DST) Received: (from lefessan@localhost) by lachesis.inria.fr (8.11.3/8.11.3) id f9PFj5p14759; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 17:45:05 +0200 X-Authentication-Warning: lachesis.inria.fr: lefessan set sender to fabrice.le_fessant@inria.fr using -f From: Fabrice Le Fessant MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <15320.13183.440243.510939@lachesis.inria.fr> Date: Thu, 25 Oct 2001 17:45:03 +0200 (CEST) To: Hendrik Tews Cc: caml-list@inria.fr Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Whither the Caml Consortium? References: <20011020012347.A29847@quincy.inria.fr> <20011019192854.N9735-100000@shell5.ba.best.com> <20011020172932.A5967@fichte.ai.univie.ac.at> <20011022192533.A12039@quincy.inria.fr> <3BD45932.6D782E08@earthlink.net> <20011024175707.A23319@dpt-info.u-strasbg.fr> <15319.58040.859039.299169@gargle.gargle.HOWL> X-Mailer: VM 6.75 under Emacs 20.7.1 Reply-To: fabrice.le_fessant@inria.fr Sender: owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr Precedence: bulk > I, for instance, would like some improvements for ocaml for which > it is absolutely impossible to get scientific reward, and which > are therefore very difficult to get implemented by the ocaml > developers. Take for instance better error diagnostics from the > ocaml parser or Thierry Bravier's ocamlyacc patch > (http://caml.inria.fr/archives/199712/msg00020.html). One way to > get these things done is to join the consortium ... > > Another possibility is to write a patch (like Thierry did) and > get it into the ocaml distribution (what Thierry not achieved). > However, it is not clear (at least to me) what requirements have > to be met, to get such an improvement accepted by the ocaml > developers. > > I think, what is needed is that the ocaml developers give some > guidelines on how we ``small'' ocaml users should proceed, if we > want to contribute something to the ocaml kernel. Then there > would be no need for us to join the consortium. If you want to contribute to ocaml, one possibility is to put your libraries and patches in the CDK (Caml Development Kit). Maybe you don't know, but the CDK is distributed with a patched version of the ocaml compiler. As a consequence, the ocamlyacc patch for example can be applied to the CDK ocaml compiler, and distributed in next releases, so that it is possible to test whether a patch is really useful or nor before complete integration in the original ocaml compiler. I think the CDK can be seen as a complement to the Consortium, since the consortium is used by corporates to contribute (with money) to ocaml, while the CDK is used by programmers to contribute (with code) ... Regards, -- Fabrice ------------------- Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/ To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr Archives: http://caml.inria.fr