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 mail2-relais-roc.national.inria.fr (mail2-relais-roc.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.83]) by sympa.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AD20C81799 for ; Thu, 25 Jul 2013 20:28:02 +0200 (CEST) Received-SPF: None (mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr: no sender authenticity information available from domain of fabrissimo@gmail.com) identity=pra; client-ip=209.85.128.169; receiver=mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr; envelope-from="fabrissimo@gmail.com"; x-sender="fabrissimo@gmail.com"; x-conformance=sidf_compatible Received-SPF: Pass (mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr: domain of fabrissimo@gmail.com designates 209.85.128.169 as permitted sender) identity=mailfrom; client-ip=209.85.128.169; receiver=mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr; envelope-from="fabrissimo@gmail.com"; x-sender="fabrissimo@gmail.com"; x-conformance=sidf_compatible; x-record-type="v=spf1" Received-SPF: None (mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr: no sender authenticity information available from domain of postmaster@mail-ve0-f169.google.com) identity=helo; client-ip=209.85.128.169; receiver=mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr; envelope-from="fabrissimo@gmail.com"; x-sender="postmaster@mail-ve0-f169.google.com"; x-conformance=sidf_compatible X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AiMCAE1t8VHRVYCpm2dsb2JhbABbgztQtR+IQoEPCBYOAQEBAQEGCwsJFCiCJAEBAwEBQAE4AQMBCwEFBQs7IhIBBQEcBhMIDAYBh2MDCQYMnC+PToRtJw2IWAEFDI9thAsDl1+PaBYpgV2CXzo X-IPAS-Result: AiMCAE1t8VHRVYCpm2dsb2JhbABbgztQtR+IQoEPCBYOAQEBAQEGCwsJFCiCJAEBAwEBQAE4AQMBCwEFBQs7IhIBBQEcBhMIDAYBh2MDCQYMnC+PToRtJw2IWAEFDI9thAsDl1+PaBYpgV2CXzo X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.89,744,1367964000"; d="scan'208";a="27336311" Received: from mail-ve0-f169.google.com ([209.85.128.169]) by mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr with ESMTP/TLS/RC4-SHA; 25 Jul 2013 20:28:01 +0200 Received: by mail-ve0-f169.google.com with SMTP id db10so687928veb.28 for ; Thu, 25 Jul 2013 11:28:01 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=Qrs17rn2pVdsKul0mNvvT9r6dv9CdW19PPIQOh4cLg4=; b=iagqWYZHN4m1e4+Ym8QKn4nmnd0EYt8JDmLDcoKNQzLjaU30ljnOm6Wbm3uQ6UpMMR DkJGSATfedCW+w8QGACLTjj/5zLf8GZbpLOXiIgLTyaRQ6iJXNG6SiJu+ZLddOFNRq9Q n6MlRRA9YFuwpimdXyIWV31vl52kND1qKF8dfQ3mq6CpzShJ21msoPLo7XzV11Vh9DTS K9Bu/begZUQ5MJZzZgi+RjVD+0eDZlAgeCbYRGYpxNYM9E9Ps8yV7lHHbXTXvYaAllWm 3wwA0ZmIpboXd6O/HuO2BHPnH0fFjRmX3o+yvcUufDQ4a2VFlvsWun4pchqZYu3pamF7 6a0w== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.58.233.8 with SMTP id ts8mr18257352vec.44.1374776880961; Thu, 25 Jul 2013 11:28:00 -0700 (PDT) Sender: fabrissimo@gmail.com Received: by 10.221.5.201 with HTTP; Thu, 25 Jul 2013 11:28:00 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <1e141e2803d9dec6a8231dd4f16dd173.squirrel@gps.dynxs.de> Date: Thu, 25 Jul 2013 20:28:00 +0200 X-Google-Sender-Auth: ovyt1Cbs4vibegbg5fTa_sv20_o Message-ID: From: Fabrice Le Fessant To: Sylvain Le Gall Cc: Ocaml Mailing List Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=089e01294edea29e8904e25a2ffd Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Re: GODI is shutting down --089e01294edea29e8904e25a2ffd Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Hi Sylvain, I am sorry you feel that way. For me, it's actually the opposite: OCamlPro tries to improve the whole OCaml development infrastructure, adding features and optimizations to the compiler, writing new generic libraries and development tools, and taking the burden of maintaining them on the long term, so that all of us, OCaml developers and companies, can focus on hacking our favorite application in OCaml, without having first to rewrite all the tools you usually find with other languages. Also, as a service-provider, we mostly only work on tools and libraries that are funded by our customers, because they think that these tools are important to their business. Our current workforce on this topic is not so big, we could do much more to improve the environment, but for that, we need to find more customers (hint :-) ) so that we can design the best solutions tailored to their needs. --Fabrice Scientific advisor for OCamlPro On Thu, Jul 25, 2013 at 6:11 PM, Sylvain Le Gall wrote: > This whole discussion has drifted into various technical topics but I > would like to give my POV on the general topic of OCamlPro vs some > members of the community. > I think OPAM is a great piece of work and I wished we can have two > package manager, including GODI for which I have contributed a little. > > OCamlPro has the worforce to do things that most of the individuals > cannot do: have a team of engineers working on an OCaml topic. That's > great expect that when you know your software is on the list of topics. > When you are a team of 1 and OCamlPro has decided to work on something > close to what you are doing, you know that you should stop working on it > because you cannot compete (lack of time, lack of workforce). > > This kind of feeling makes me extremly uncomfortable about the future of > all the libraries I maintain. This kind of FUD is extremly > counter-productive for any OCaml dev. > > To give you a quick taste of that, you can read: > http://hal.inria.fr/docs/00/66/59/62/PDF/paper_10.pdf (fr) > > where you can see that ocp-build is supposed to replace OASIS > (explanation about why OASIS doesn't fit, p2 at the beginning) and that > it should replace findlib's META file (p12, Conclusion). > > Some people will see a good news in this document and some people will > feel uncomfortable (like me). > > I don't think making some people feel uncomfortable is great. > > Given OCamlPro position, I would love to see them achieve great things > and solve long standing issue like: > https://github.com/lucasaiu/ocaml (a reentrant runtime which should be > the stepping stone for parallelism in OCaml) > > I think it would be a lot more productive than to replace every OCaml > tools by something starting with ocp-... > > My 0.02 cents > Sylvain > --089e01294edea29e8904e25a2ffd Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hi Sylvain,

I am sorry you feel that wa= y.=A0

For me, it's actually the opposite: OCam= lPro tries to improve the whole OCaml development infrastructure, adding fe= atures and optimizations to the compiler, writing new generic libraries and= development tools, and taking the burden of maintaining them on the long t= erm, so that all of us, OCaml developers and companies, can focus on hackin= g our favorite application in OCaml, without having first to rewrite all th= e tools you usually find with other languages.

Also, as a service-provider, we mostly only work on too= ls and libraries that are funded by our customers, because they think that = these tools are important to their business. Our current workforce on this = topic is not so big, we could do much more to improve the environment, but = for that, we need to find more customers (hint :-) ) so that we can design = the best solutions tailored to their needs.

--Fabrice
Scientific advisor for OCamlPro

On Thu, Jul 25, 2013 at 6:11 PM, Sylvain Le Gall <= sylvain@le-gall.net> wrote:
This whole discussion has drifted into various technical to= pics but I
would like to give my POV on the general topic of OCamlPro vs some
members of the community.

I think OPAM is a great piece of work and I wished we can have two
package manager, including GODI for which I have contributed a little.

OCamlPro has the worforce to do things that most of the individuals
cannot do: have a team of engineers working on an OCaml topic. That's great expect that when you know your software is on the list of topics.
When you are a team of 1 and OCamlPro has decided to work on something
close to what you are doing, you know that you should stop working on it
because you cannot compete (lack of time, lack of workforce).

This kind of feeling makes me extremly uncomfortable about the future of
all the libraries I maintain. This kind of FUD is extremly
counter-productive for any OCaml dev.

To give you a quick taste of that, you can read:
http://hal.inria.fr/docs/00/66/59/62/PDF/paper_10.pdf (fr)

where you can see that ocp-build is supposed to replace OASIS
(explanation about why OASIS doesn't fit, p2 at the beginning) and that=
it should replace findlib's META file (p12, Conclusion).

Some people will see a good news in this document and some people will
feel uncomfortable (like me).

I don't think making some people feel uncomfortable is great.

Given OCamlPro position, I would love to see them achieve great things
and solve long standing issue like:
https://git= hub.com/lucasaiu/ocaml (a reentrant runtime which should be
the stepping stone for parallelism in OCaml)

I think it would be a lot more productive than to replace every OCaml
tools by something starting with ocp-...

My 0.02 cents
Sylvain

--089e01294edea29e8904e25a2ffd--