Browse thread
ocaml-developer mailing-list: subscribe now!
[
Home
]
[ Index:
by date
|
by threads
]
[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
Date: | 2007-03-11 (15:05) |
From: | ls-ocaml-developer-2006@m... |
Subject: | Re: [Caml-list] ocaml-developer mailing-list: subscribe now! |
Martin Jambon <martin.jambon@ens-lyon.org> writes: > On Sat, 10 Mar 2007, Daniel Bünzli wrote: > >> Le 9 mars 07 à 21:02, Martin Jambon a écrit : >> >>> The Caml mailing list is intended for all users of the Caml >>> implementations developed at INRIA. The purpose of this list is to >>> share experience, exchange ideas and code, and report on >>> applications of the Caml language. >> >> I don't see why these topics cannot be discussed here. >> >> I would see the point of a domain specific mailing-list (e.g. web >> development in ocaml) but ocaml-developer seems like caml-list-2 to >> me. >> >> Could you perhaps motivate the point of your initiative ? > > 1) Less traffic Well -- if I subscribe to both lists, I'd have quite the same traffic and 2 groups to sort in my mail client instead of one. I also have 1 more group to search for ocaml related thread topics I rememebr but not quite where I read them. If I only subscribe to one list I'll miss traffic which is not clearly distinguished topically between those 2 lists. Either way, I loose. The community fragments. I prefer 1 stop shops and just skipping manually new threads I don't like: With a threaded news/mail reader and 1 new thread per day that is not a problem. > 2) Skipping all the unnecessary "language geekiness" stuff And that cannot be done by hand so that we have to split the community? > To a newcomer, caml-list looks a lot like a forum for programming > language researchers, Well -- perhaps a regular posting of a mailing list FAQ or the list charta would help to mitigate that impression. Your action, if successful will probably draw traffic from the caml-list and make it "look like" as if the popularity of ocaml has furtther declined (and BTW: This fragmentation in mailing lists has been a problem to the public perception of SML). > which is cool, but not being able to understand > 2/3 of the messages is kind of intimidating for someone who thought > he/she knew OCaml. Surprise: There is lots to learn. Actually I'd call that a chance or a challenge as opposed to boredom and ennui. Regards -- Markus