From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail4-relais-sop.national.inria.fr (mail4-relais-sop.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.105]) by walapai.inria.fr (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id pB6CKILP030970 for ; Tue, 6 Dec 2011 13:20:18 +0100 X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AvYBAB0I3k7RVdY2kGdsb2JhbABEqT6BFQgiAQEBAQkJDQcUBCGBcgEBAQMBEgIsAQE3AQQLBQYOJhI0AQUBHAYkAw6HZQKXdQqKM4QcAY5cB4pPY6JWPYN4 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.71,305,1320620400"; d="scan'208";a="122224409" Received: from mail-bw0-f54.google.com ([209.85.214.54]) by mail4-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr with ESMTP/TLS/RC4-SHA; 06 Dec 2011 13:20:12 +0100 Received: by bkat2 with SMTP id t2so12873660bka.27 for ; Tue, 06 Dec 2011 04:20:12 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlemail.com; s=gamma; h=subject:mime-version:content-type:from:x-priority:in-reply-to:date :cc:content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to:x-mailer; bh=F/ewRi6RZwwtc8p5XAlZbfKLHSlLmivHMebyCWDoZk0=; b=Zt2XV7MgmYEnAy7ugJpoA4M+MrfAKr/hrisaJh4QnUtDgN9WDLNAwg2xi768pW9WnF x5+llb+0Vi70EO34J+ZG9aNaSxdfXz/mfh9w5ROzB+32+jmkIKqegTGBv6Iueit28WhH RHKiQa0X3pwy7OPn8wS9D3YQ1WF2ld59yu2MQ= Received: by 10.216.49.1 with SMTP id w1mr343157web.29.1323174012157; Tue, 06 Dec 2011 04:20:12 -0800 (PST) Received: from coruscant.kosmos.all (ip-95-223-170-32.unitymediagroup.de. [95.223.170.32]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id ep16sm33276657wbb.21.2011.12.06.04.20.09 (version=SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Tue, 06 Dec 2011 04:20:10 -0800 (PST) Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1251.1) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 From: Benedikt Meurer X-Priority: 3 (Normal) In-Reply-To: Date: Tue, 6 Dec 2011 13:20:10 +0100 Cc: caml-list@inria.fr Message-Id: References: <1B0D83BD-1902-4F7C-B3FB-B759122D6AB9@googlemail.com> To: Gerd Stolpmann X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1251.1) Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by walapai.inria.fr id pB6CKILP030970 Subject: Re: [Caml-list] OCaml maintenance status / community fork On Dec 6, 2011, at 11:00 , Gerd Stolpmann wrote: > I'd say it depends very much for which kind of work the community fork is > used. If it is just for enhancing the standard library, please don't do it > - there are as many opinions as contributors. If it is for fixing bugs I'm > for it - provided there is a process to get the fixes back to the original > Ocaml version. Yes that'd be one major goal: to get patches applied (whether they're fixing bugs or adding features). Whether it will be possible to get the "original OCaml version" updated using a new process or whether the "original OCaml" will be obsolete at some point,... I don't know. I guess time will tell. At least we'll see some more activity in the OCaml core area again. > Regarding your work, Benedikt, I'm not sure what would be the best. It's > highly interesting work, but it's deeply changing the compiler, so > probably not something a community of volunteers could review (although > they could test it at least). I can't tell you right now how these things are going to work out, I'm open for suggestions. Most of what I have in the pipe (and others who sent me their patches for review because they haven't received any response from the OCaml team) does not "deeply change the compiler". The largest patch, which I'm working on right now, is about replacing the existing arm port with two new ports, armel and armhf, to overcome the various issues with the existing port (and to utilize VFP/Neon hardware in modern ARM boards/netbooks). > I'd see this more as an effort to organize help for the core team, and it > would be essential that the "fork" is working in both directions. ... or as an effort to disconnect "core team" and INRIA... > Gerd Benedikt