On Sat, 20 Oct 2001, Markus Mottl wrote:
> It may even be the case that the mentioned companies only joined
> in, because they have so specific needs that it is unlikely that
> other companies will solve their problems in the Consortium. So the
> realistic assumption is that the current three members haven't joined
> the Consortium out of altruism and love for OCaml, but merely out of
> very specific selfish reasons, which may not necessarily be for the
> benefit of the whole OCaml-community. I am not accusing anybody here,
> it's just one possible, rational explanation...

I think altruism and love for OCaml is a lot closer than very specific
selfish reasons. That's still not quite right, maybe idealism and civic
virtue come closer?

I can't speak for the other companies, but I think that's not an
inaccurate picture of where I work.

I'm not convinced that my, or anyone else's, behavior is entirely rational,
or at least that the objective function and even the decision variables aren't
somewhat arbitrary. So the model of a corporation as a purely money optimizing
entity is inaccurate. But I'll stop here, this list isn't the place for a
discussion of my world view; if you want that, join the Consortium and
I'll send you a private, copyrighted e-mail :-).

> To answer Brian here: it's not the fault of the companies that haven't
> yet joined in. It's probably just that the current scheme may not be
> the most appropriate one for our goals...

No doubt the process and goals of the Consortium can be tuned.

Thanks for your altruistic work on behalf of OCaml, Markus!

-- Brian


-------------------
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