Browse thread
Sorted list
[
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: | 2007-08-04 (18:04) |
From: | skaller <skaller@u...> |
Subject: | Re: [Caml-list] Sorted list |
On Sat, 2007-08-04 at 19:35 +0200, Julien Moutinho wrote: > On Sun, Aug 05, 2007 at 01:42:21AM +1000, skaller wrote: > > So Inria should provide the repository, and the Ocaml team has > > a final veto on selection .. but the work is done by outside > > volunteers. > I am quite half-hearted about the idea of an Inrians' veto, > despite the fact that, they sure know how to select. Inria will be held responsible for the packaging and libraries even if they disclaim authorship: they have a right under those circumstances to be selective and authoritarian. They also have to manage the respository and .. > That said... do they have enough manpower for such a peer-review task? No, of course not: they don't have enough to do the type theory they want to do. A project like Ocaml never has 'enough' resources. It's a question of bang-for-buck: leverage. A small investment of effort by Inria could provide a large return. > > So please would the High Priests of the Cathedral like > > to run a little Bazaar for their disciples? > Yep, Bazaar or another free software with a distributed repository model. Heh .. I wasn't actually suggesting bzr.. Inria use CVS so we'd be stuck with that. -- John Skaller <skaller at users dot sf dot net> Felix, successor to C++: http://felix.sf.net