Brandon J. Van Every wrote:
> I don't easily swallow "no duplicate functionality," however.  Libraries
> have to prove their worth in the field somehow.

I think the Linux kernel developers have a good way of handling this: if 
there are two competing libraries that do the same thing, they both stay 
outside the project, as patches, until there is a consensus about which 
is better; then the maintainers include one of the libraries in the 
project, and the other one takes a bow and honourably leaves the 
stage.[1]  The maintainers' job is to ensure that this process is 
neither too long nor too short.  It's OK to have two libraries that do 
the same thing for a short time, in order to choose the best approach; 
but in the long term, duplication leads to wasted effort.

Therefore, both libraries should have a chance to prove themselves; but 
if after a certain amount of time there is no clear consensus about 
which is better, and it is not feasible to combine the best aspects of 
both, the maintainers should use their own judgement and pick one of 
them, which is what Linus does.  It is better to resolve conflicts and 
move on than to let them persist endlessly.

Ben

[1] For a good example of this, see: 
http://www-124.ibm.com/pthreads/docs/announcement

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