On Thu, 23 Aug 2001, Alain Frisch wrote:
> I think it is best to keep the OCaml distribution as small as possible,
> and to facilitate the installation of other packages.

I fully second this. Though I wouldn't mind PCRE being integrated
into the standard distribution, I'd strongly prefer a convenient and
safe packaging system. This is actually the top entry on my wish list,
because I consider this the feature that would most likely make OCaml
attractive to the mainstream.

Today there are _plenty_ of OCaml-libraries floating around for the most
varied purposes. Still, each of them comes with a non-standard way of
installation (if at all...!). This is a _severe_ obstacle to exploiting
the merits of free software development.

> The current CDK approach seems a bit unrealistic to me: will a few
> people take in charge the integration of all 3rd party packages ?
> Something like CPAN seems more promising.

I agree.

> (I don't see how it could work without the support or at least an
> initial impulsion from the Caml team, but they have probably more
> interesting things to do. Maybe if would be in the interest of the
> Caml Consortium to coordinate 3rd party efforts; is the status of the
> Consortium a public information ?)

Development of "social tools" would certainly be very beneficial for
industrial use: fewer hassles for employed programmers, more available
software, potentially more OCaml-programmers that can be hired, etc.
I don't think it would be terribly expensive to let somebody do it. The
Consortium should be very interested in funding such efforts.

Regards,
Markus Mottl

-- 
Markus Mottl                                             markus@oefai.at
Austrian Research Institute
for Artificial Intelligence                  http://www.oefai.at/~markus
-------------------
Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs  FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/
To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr  Archives: http://caml.inria.fr