[2nd try. The first went to DOFP only]

> La communaute ne semble meme pas capable de se mettre d'accord sur la
> nomenclature de ses bibliotheques. Verra-t-on ensuite une querelle
> pour savoir qui detient le veritable "ocamlmakefile", "ocamlxml" ou
> encore "ocamlyacc" ?
>
> Il me semble raisonnable que l'utilisateur ait une vision claire de ce
> qui est officiellement developpe par l'INRIA et de ce qui ne l'est
> pas.
>
> Raison pour laquelle il me semble que l'INRIA devrait etre plus
> vigilant au sujet de la nomenclature, par exemple en affirmant sa
> primaute sur le suffixe ocaml* en demandant aux autres bibliotheques
> de migrer vers caml* telle CamlImages, ou encore en demandant aux
> contributeurs d'eviter des noms equivoques tels ExtLib.
>
> Je me trouve apres coup bien aimable de n'avoir pas nomme Baire plutot
> OCamlStdLib : c'est bien plus vendeur.
>
>         Diego Olivier
En fait, tout le monde parle Francais ici?

To get back to the perl example:

This is a point where a *central* repository for libraries with good search 
feature is important. For example: I once had a neat way of writing 
(creating, parsing) simplified DOM trees in Perl, and when I wanted to 
publish it, I found out that there actually was a module doing practically 
the same thing. So, unless you're unlucky and two people develop at home 
during 2 years one library and then submit it within one week, there is not 
much probability of unintentionally duplicated work within Perl.

However, for toplevel namespaces, you have to write to a mailing list, and 
there is a group of people who decide if to accept the new toplevel namespace 
or not. This is a (AFAIK also known) bottleneck..

My suggestion:
___
While waiting for nested namespaces one could do namespace-by-convention. One 
would keep INRIA (or possibly something convenient and shorter) as prefix for 
INRIA OCaml stuff, leaving other useful prefixes for the normal people. This 
namespace could then be maintained in a perlish style. Reading this list from 
time to time it is quite clear that there is a number of people who mail a 
lot to this list, who know a lot about OCaml (as far as I can judge this as 
someone who knows little about OCaml), and who would be suitable for being 
maintainers of the toplevel namespace.

Sounds good?

Cheers,
Wolfgang

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