Re: [Caml-list] OCaml maintenance status / community fork (again)

[Benedikt Meurer <benedikt.meurer@googlemail.com>]

On Dec 9, 2011, at 18:00 , Mehdi Dogguy wrote:

> On 12/09/2011 03:24 PM, Benedikt Meurer wrote:
>> 
>> Right. I would like to place focus on discussing this point, as it 
>> seems to be the root of the evil. It would be so easy to fix, IMHO, 
>> and you don't need to give up control by the core team. Why not 
>> accept a model similar to i.e. the NetBSD project, with a lot of 
>> committers (experts in their own areas) and 2-3 people to keep an
>> eye on the overall direction?
> 
> or instead of changing how OCaml is currently handled by INRIA's team,
> we could consider some development model similar to Eglibc's one. Eglibc
> is not a fork of glibc, but a glibc distribution.

Whether you call it a "fork" or a "distribution" doesn't matter. It's basically what I described in my initial proposal for a "community fork" (or a "community distribution"). Simply a place where contributors are welcome, patches are reviewed and processed (in a reasonable time frame), with focus on cooperation and communication.

If people fear the word "fork", can we agree on a "community distribution" (in the eglibc sense) instead?

> http://lwn.net/Articles/333755/ could be an interesting read (for those
> who care).

While we don't have a Drepper here in OCaml land (yet?), there are certainly a few common problems, Stephane already mentioned OCaml as an unpleasant upstream.

> Regards,
> Mehdi Dogguy مهدي الدڤي

Benedikt