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 9B4EE7EE60 for ; Wed, 3 Apr 2013 18:39:24 +0200 (CEST) Received-SPF: None (mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr: no sender authenticity information available from domain of mmatalka@gmail.com) identity=pra; client-ip=209.85.192.180; receiver=mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr; envelope-from="mmatalka@gmail.com"; x-sender="mmatalka@gmail.com"; x-conformance=sidf_compatible Received-SPF: Pass (mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr: domain of mmatalka@gmail.com designates 209.85.192.180 as permitted sender) identity=mailfrom; client-ip=209.85.192.180; receiver=mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr; envelope-from="mmatalka@gmail.com"; x-sender="mmatalka@gmail.com"; 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@mail-pd0-f180.google.com) identity=helo; client-ip=209.85.192.180; receiver=mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr; envelope-from="mmatalka@gmail.com"; x-sender="postmaster@mail-pd0-f180.google.com"; x-conformance=sidf_compatible X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AucBAMNaXFHRVcC0nGdsb2JhbABDgmZXriuSFoEMFg4BAQEBAQYNCQkUKIIfAQEEAR0jARsMBgsBAwELBgUOCgkEIQ8BBA0CEQEFAQoYExICh20BAwkGAQuiLIwvgnuERQoZJwMKWYh8AQUMjDuCUgeDQAOVC4J/ilEDgzY/hEo X-IPAS-Result: AucBAMNaXFHRVcC0nGdsb2JhbABDgmZXriuSFoEMFg4BAQEBAQYNCQkUKIIfAQEEAR0jARsMBgsBAwELBgUOCgkEIQ8BBA0CEQEFAQoYExICh20BAwkGAQuiLIwvgnuERQoZJwMKWYh8AQUMjDuCUgeDQAOVC4J/ilEDgzY/hEo X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.87,402,1363129200"; d="scan'208";a="9665566" Received: from mail-pd0-f180.google.com ([209.85.192.180]) by mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr with ESMTP/TLS/RC4-SHA; 03 Apr 2013 18:39:23 +0200 Received: by mail-pd0-f180.google.com with SMTP id q11so944465pdj.11 for ; Wed, 03 Apr 2013 09:39:21 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=x-received:from:to:cc:subject:references:date:in-reply-to :message-id:user-agent:mime-version:content-type; bh=ZSF27LL/wiETHHnHmWajqn4AH4WB5HZ+kyqOUXWuQx4=; b=EYp8JHCEddZzSgBeTl02uKa2s8dt/GXetHfiUKfyEhmh+8JVN6B+atBxnLPTxCtzM1 P5IYYYIRUzDDgSOcCV0IlMIT/muH3ght/YC0ApVZQbggx8NYMomDLgyV8ivHFdae1Pp2 6eL/8UzuqSjCQdcwFePn9YViicw1YDyq0QH6VBDg6KNbBgsDMq6NRo2ANA/nFr1c+YR9 ba6kSIfDjks+c6LEjn9Lj45vDabdSev43qp4oezf6T4VGrHQSdrdZkE01bCDDfvOQg8C 8X8L4BJopuJgZuFHP+oulHtbCMfr4gEdLVoEkNezcgviYJ5OjvegmL+6m+lyFKxDF7HR 1CMw== X-Received: by 10.68.234.42 with SMTP id ub10mr3679971pbc.1.1365007161565; Wed, 03 Apr 2013 09:39:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost ([2a01:7e00::f03c:91ff:fedf:4d21]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id hu2sm6577931pbc.38.2013.04.03.09.39.19 (version=TLSv1.1 cipher=RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Wed, 03 Apr 2013 09:39:20 -0700 (PDT) From: Malcolm Matalka To: Gerd Stolpmann Cc: Anil Madhavapeddy , caml-list@inria.fr References: <1365003773.10138.2@samsung> Date: Wed, 03 Apr 2013 12:39:17 -0400 In-Reply-To: <1365003773.10138.2@samsung> (Gerd Stolpmann's message of "Wed, 03 Apr 2013 17:42:53 +0200") Message-ID: <87y5cz8t6y.fsf@li195-236.members.linode.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Subject: Re: AW: [Caml-list] OUD2013 part of CUFP? OUD was part of CUFP last year, which is the Commercial part of ICFP. I did not attend ICFP but just CUFP, and didn't find OUD or CUFP too academic. Did you? /M Gerd Stolpmann writes: > Sorry Anil, > > I did meant to criticize people who put a lot of work into organizing > events. On the contrary, this is highly welcome. > > My point is rather that you get a certain audience when an event is > organized as an addendum to a large academic conference. You don't get > the average programmer, but people with a strong academic background. > Or more direct: OUD is then just a side program for people who attend > ICFP anyway. > > Am 03.04.2013 15:41:47 schrieb(en) Anil Madhavapeddy: >> On 3 Apr 2013, at 06:10, Gerd Stolpmann >> wrote: >> >> > Am 03.04.2013 13:22:07 schrieb(en) Anil Madhavapeddy: >> >> On 3 Apr 2013, at 01:24, Malcolm Matalka >> wrote: >> >> > Last year, OUD was part of CUFP and it worked great. I'm >> wondering if >> >> > it's the same this year? >> >> > >> >> Yes, it is part of ICFP 2013 (in Boston this year), and is being >> chaired by Michel Mauny this year. The Call for Proposals hasn't >> gone yet out. >> > >> > Too sad. OCaml not leaving the Cathedral. I liked the idea of the >> first couple of OUD events of keeping some distance to academic >> rituals. >> >> Nothing stops you from organising your own group, inviting people, >> reserving a building, sorting out registration, invoicing sponsors, >> organising local facilities and lunch, recording the talks, and >> uploading them online. ICFP's "rituals" take care of all of that for >> us (Sylvain did a big job before). > > This is not meant with "rituals". The ritual is to visit ICFP every > year. The ritual is to publish a paper every year and to bore the > audience, as it happens often enough. This is acceptable as being part > of science, but I just have some doubts whether this is the right > environment for a users' meeting, especially if you also want to > address users outside universities and research institutes. > >> Your cathedral analogy also doesn't make any sense to me. I like >> attending a few days in one go where I can interact with OCaml, ML, >> Haskell, Scheme, Erlang, and F# users at the same time, see talks >> from industrial users at CUFP, and enjoy hearing the excitement and >> wails of the emerging new languages being developed by the community. > > As an "industrial" user I am very interested into spreading out the > word to the masses. We have difficulties finding programmers, which is > no wonder if nobody (on the street) has ever heard of the language. > What we need are not further talks at scientific conferences, but at > events attended by more average people. That could e.g. be open source > conferences, hacker events, etc. > > I put "industrial" in quotes because there isn't an industry yet. The > companies using OCaml are doing this for very individual reasons, and > there is not much cooperation (so far I can see that). > > As you mention CUFP, this is a different type of thing. It's a > collection of success stories to encourage companies (and more > something for CTOs and chief architects). > >> The rotating locations also enables worldwide users to attend, >> instead of just European ones. The ICFP/CUFP at Japan a few years >> ago represented a big jump in attendance from the Asian community. >> ICFP moves across Europe, Asia and the USA, which is difficult to >> arrange with a single user group. > > Don't get me wrong, but a "travelling" conference has also many cons. > E.g. in general it is harder to plan the attendance (reserving time, > planning the costs, etc.), especially if the location is not at a > traffic hub. > >> Having said that, having more local meetups is a very positive thing. >> Ashish and Christophe have been tracking them here: >> http://ocaml.org/meetings.html >> Do get involved and set up your own. > > Thanks for the suggestion, but I think I'm really doing enough for the > success of OCaml. > > Gerd > >> -anil >> >> >> -- >> Caml-list mailing list. Subscription management and archives: >> https://sympa.inria.fr/sympa/arc/caml-list >> Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners >> Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs >>