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 MAA24586; Mon, 29 Oct 2001 12:16:19 +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 MAA24777 for ; Mon, 29 Oct 2001 12:16:18 +0100 (MET) Received: from dpt-info.u-strasbg.fr (dpt-info.u-strasbg.fr [130.79.44.193]) by nez-perce.inria.fr (8.11.1/8.10.0) with ESMTP id f9TBGHn16701; Mon, 29 Oct 2001 12:16:17 +0100 (MET) Received: (from luther@localhost) by dpt-info.u-strasbg.fr (8.9.3/8.9.3) id MAA21442; Mon, 29 Oct 2001 12:15:30 +0100 Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2001 12:15:30 +0100 From: Sven To: Xavier Leroy Cc: Hendrik Tews , caml-list@inria.fr Subject: Re: [Caml-list] user contributions to the core OCaml distribution? Message-ID: <20011029121530.A21407@dpt-info.u-strasbg.fr> 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> <20011026141347.A32249@pauillac.inria.fr> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 1.0.1i In-Reply-To: <20011026141347.A32249@pauillac.inria.fr>; from xavier.leroy@inria.fr on Fri, Oct 26, 2001 at 02:13:47PM +0200 Sender: owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr Precedence: bulk On Fri, Oct 26, 2001 at 02:13:47PM +0200, Xavier Leroy wrote: > - Don't be disappointed if your wish or patch isn't incorporated in the > OCaml working sources. There might be several reasons for this: > maybe we don't like the feature; maybe we like it but would > implement it differently; maybe we have longer term plans to address > the problem; maybe we have higher-priority stuff to deal with; etc. > We (the core Caml development team) keep control on what gets in, > Consortium or not. mmm, this sound as no particular feedback or reason for rejecting a proposal will be given. Maybe, even a few line status or reason for rejection may be appended in the BTS for this feature wish, or something such ? Friendly, Sven Luther ------------------- 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