And what makes all that you've said really bad is that www.ocaml.org is 
the first site I found. And I've found
it referenced in lots of other places. I still claim that the current 
www.ocaml.org site HAS the right idea,
and has a decent format. It isn't perfect, but what is. If some of the 
links to dead end projects were cleaned
off it, and the news items were updated, it would be a very good site.

On Mar 19, 2004, at 2:34 PM, Benjamin Geer wrote:

> Eric Stokes wrote:
>> (the index site, see #1)
>> http://www.ocaml.org/
>> Actually is a very good index site, almost on par with perl's. Has 
>> all the relevant requirements,
>
> I think it's an embarrassment.  It's an unmaintained site that hasn't 
> updated since 2002.  It's actually worse than no site at all, because 
> it contains links to dead projects (e.g. the Caml Development Kit and 
> the OCaml IRC Server, which doesn't even exist anymore).  As you point 
> out, the news items haven't been updated since 2002, which strongly 
> gives the impression that Caml is completely dead.  Worst of all, it 
> uses the word 'hacker', which to most managers means 'criminal that 
> tries to attack my servers'.  Whoever created this site would be doing 
> the Caml community a great service by taking it off the web.  The 
> caml.inria.fr site is ugly, but at least it's correct and up to date.
>
> Ben
>
> -------------------
> 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
>

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