From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Original-To: caml-list@sympa.inria.fr Delivered-To: caml-list@sympa.inria.fr Received: from mail3-relais-sop.national.inria.fr (mail3-relais-sop.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.104]) by sympa.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C200C7FE36 for ; Mon, 11 Jul 2016 20:34:53 +0200 (CEST) IronPort-PHdr: 9a23:QlfanBdl4O5tfDXSBsLsvtj7lGMj4u6mDksu8pMizoh2WeGdxc6/ZR7h7PlgxGXEQZ/co6odzbGH6+a7BCdfsN6oizMrSNR0TRgLiMEbzUQLIfWuLgnFFsPsdDEwB89YVVVorDmROElRH9viNRWJ+iXhpQAbFhi3DwdpPOO9QteU1JXvkbvvsMKCKyxzxxOFKYtoKxu3qQiD/uI3uqBFbpgL9x3Sv3FTcP5Xz247bXianhL7+9vitMU7q3cY6Lod8JtsWKP7cqBwZyheHjAnezQ57cvquB2FRxaC4GkYU00biABBHwnc8Ry8VZen4QXgse8o8SWAPMDwBZY9VTm4p/NiRAXphSEvMTkl8yfQkMMm3/ETmw6ouxEqm92cW4qSLvcrJq4= Authentication-Results: mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr; spf=None smtp.pra=adrien@notk.org; spf=Pass smtp.mailfrom=adrien@notk.org; spf=None smtp.helo=postmaster@nautica.notk.org Received-SPF: None (mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr: no sender authenticity information available from domain of adrien@notk.org) identity=pra; client-ip=91.121.71.147; receiver=mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr; envelope-from="adrien@notk.org"; x-sender="adrien@notk.org"; x-conformance=sidf_compatible Received-SPF: Pass (mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr: domain of adrien@notk.org designates 91.121.71.147 as permitted sender) identity=mailfrom; client-ip=91.121.71.147; receiver=mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr; envelope-from="adrien@notk.org"; x-sender="adrien@notk.org"; x-conformance=sidf_compatible; x-record-type="v=spf1" Received-SPF: None (mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr: no sender authenticity information available from domain of postmaster@nautica.notk.org) identity=helo; client-ip=91.121.71.147; receiver=mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr; envelope-from="adrien@notk.org"; x-sender="postmaster@nautica.notk.org"; x-conformance=sidf_compatible X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: A0BqBgDE5YNX/5NHeVtdgz68T4JhgzcCgSo8EAEBAQEBAQEBZCeCMhWCFgEFIw8BPQkQCxgCAgUMBw4CAg8FGDGIR7Btjl0BAQEHAgEkgQGFJoRNhB5igkIrgi8FmRiJB4VBCmaORpAPNR+CCRyBTjqILoFDAQEB X-IPAS-Result: A0BqBgDE5YNX/5NHeVtdgz68T4JhgzcCgSo8EAEBAQEBAQEBZCeCMhWCFgEFIw8BPQkQCxgCAgUMBw4CAg8FGDGIR7Btjl0BAQEHAgEkgQGFJoRNhB5igkIrgi8FmRiJB4VBCmaORpAPNR+CCRyBTjqILoFDAQEB X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.28,347,1464645600"; d="scan'208";a="184543722" Received: from nautica.notk.org ([91.121.71.147]) by mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 11 Jul 2016 20:34:52 +0200 Received: by nautica.notk.org (Postfix, from userid 1003) id C6E24C009; Mon, 11 Jul 2016 20:34:51 +0200 (CEST) Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2016 20:34:51 +0200 From: Adrien Nader To: Daniel =?utf-8?Q?B=C3=BCnzli?= Cc: Goswin von Brederlow , caml-list@inria.fr Message-ID: <20160711183451.GA20894@notk.org> References: <5E818FB5-6908-4E29-838E-C6A2836F60CE@inria.fr> <7BDA5C9D56314AE6A0D9E07226862399@erratique.ch> <3004f713-9b54-b221-16c3-f4302abc1a44@lexifi.com> <105BC114A91747C4A583F92DB6AD6BA8@erratique.ch> <20160711085535.GA5328@frosties> <583E8E2B027F438686B3428432F20F17@erratique.ch> <20160711094832.GA13615@notk.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Subject: Re: [Caml-list] About contributions to the Standard Library On Mon, Jul 11, 2016, Daniel Bünzli wrote: > Le lundi, 11 juillet 2016 à 10:48, Adrien Nader a écrit : > > For debian oldstable, the OCaml release arrived only a > > few weeks, at most months, late; I wouldn't blame Debian for not going > > with something that was known to not be very stable. > > Sure, but what strikes me is that people feel that supporting the OCaml version distributed by mainstream system packagers is important. > > I see the later as being a medium to distribute end-user application that are installable by the same package system not as a medium that is useful to support the working OCaml programmer. I see it as important because things get a bit sad if your code never reaches end-users. If you look around, you'll see that many large-ish projects have shifted to time-based releases. That said, I don't like calling them "time-based" because the approach is more to limit the scope and avoid schedule slips by having a clear and simple measurement (time left before the given day) that is also known in advance. Of course, with time-based releases, it is also possible to synchronize in order to always release right after distros freeze. The idea is rather to take them into account because getting stable and reasonably-recent software to users is really. Releasing stable versions is a time-consuming work not matter the topic and I don't find it sane to not take them into account. -- Adrien Nader