Daniel de Rauglaudre wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> On Sun, Oct 06, 2002 at 03:29:59PM -0400, Oleg wrote:
> 
> 
>>Could you explain what you mean by "compromising the future of Camlp4"?
>>I thought Camlp4 project was not affiliated with the O'Caml project / team.
> 
> 
> It would be good, indeed, that Camlp4 be separated from OCaml, but
> the direction of the OCaml team refuses that energically. However
> it was a good compromise.
> 
> He jeopardizes the future of Camlp4 because he gives me two choices:
> either return working on the ocaml/camlp4 version (what I refuse), or
> quit the projet. And if I quit the projet, who is going to improve
> Camlp4?

 >:-|

Why in the world do you guys take such strong stands in your 
respective positions? I am no one to give you advice, but, 
really, take it easy...

> Ok Camlp4 will not die then: it will just be maintained, debugged,
> just like Caml Light. No future developpment can happen, since nobody
> knows Camlp4 like me.

As an aside, what is the purpose of developing Caml Light, 
anyway. Should it not simply be superseded by O'Caml?

Alex

-------------------
To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr Archives: http://caml.inria.fr
Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/
Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners