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 pB9EOrQC016289
	for <caml-list@sympa-roc.inria.fr>; Fri, 9 Dec 2011 15:24:53 +0100
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AhMBAPEZ4k7RVdY2kGdsb2JhbABDp3aCewgiAQEBAQkJDQcUBCGBcgEBAQMBDAYCLAEBKQ4BBAsLNBI0AQUBHAYnDodlApkpCoozhBwBjgcHiw9jomU9g3o
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.71,326,1320620400"; 
   d="scan'208";a="122757782"
Received: from mail-bw0-f54.google.com ([209.85.214.54])
  by mail4-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr with ESMTP/TLS/RC4-SHA; 09 Dec 2011 15:24:33 +0100
Received: by bkbzv15 with SMTP id zv15so5024663bkb.27
        for <multiple recipients>; Fri, 09 Dec 2011 06:24:32 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
        d=googlemail.com; s=gamma;
        h=subject:mime-version:content-type:from:in-reply-to:date:cc
         :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to:x-mailer;
        bh=VhKi9ohPivPKdNRCPEa0JxICQbn0AE4TRA1fAasUbag=;
        b=BamHN9uG050Xzpv7AbzkOkcyGvEDluetQH+Elw/A47c4lWHnJnvmJWT/XdXSVyh3NC
         JA56HT9VS9w7bsXqUgI/JbJm8KJD9Yqc7ItES8Ntkz15pXyHSs6r80UipsBW8v/OVYXX
         PzDa2t/GklGYRtIEV5GXN8U2acpncn17eG0aM=
Received: by 10.204.148.76 with SMTP id o12mr3937652bkv.114.1323440672654;
        Fri, 09 Dec 2011 06:24:32 -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 fg16sm10173585bkb.16.2011.12.09.06.24.29
        (version=SSLv3 cipher=OTHER);
        Fri, 09 Dec 2011 06:24:31 -0800 (PST)
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1251.1)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
From: Benedikt Meurer <benedikt.meurer@googlemail.com>
In-Reply-To: <1323427075.32238.91.camel@arrakis>
Date: Fri, 9 Dec 2011 15:24:28 +0100
Cc: Jacques Garrigue <garrigue@math.nagoya-u.ac.jp>,
        caml users <caml-list@inria.fr>, Caml-devel developers <caml@inria.fr>
Message-Id: <CC7DCA7C-F49E-4729-A185-F6CFED8B57DC@googlemail.com>
References: <55531934-37A5-4CC5-AB67-20CE4CCE8269@googlemail.com> <F1C3BA1F-BA82-4F09-AD81-FD3264C0C224@math.nagoya-u.ac.jp> <1323427075.32238.91.camel@arrakis>
To: =?iso-8859-1?Q?J=E9r=E9mie_Dimino?= <jeremie@dimino.org>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1251.1)
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by walapai.inria.fr id pB9EOrQC016289
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] OCaml maintenance status / community fork (again)


On Dec 9, 2011, at 11:37 , Jérémie Dimino wrote:

> Le vendredi 09 décembre 2011 à 11:11 +0900, Jacques Garrigue a écrit :
>> I do agree that the problem with ARM reflect some problem in the current development
>> organization, but I don't think that you need to fork to solve it.
>> *(And note by the way that a real fork could be in contradiction with the QPL.)*
> 
> I thought OCaml was a free software...

I'm not a lawyer, but the QPL is not necessarily compatible with free software licenses, as already noted in another thread.

> Seriously, i don't understand why a fork would be a bad thing. There are
> lots of parts for which one don't need to be superman to contribute. And
> right now there are lots of trivial patches on the tracker that remain
> without response after several years, so there is clearly a need for
> improvement.


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?

Benedikt