Browse thread
The OCaml Community (aka back from the Developer Days)
[
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: | -- (:) |
| From: | Romain Beauxis <toots@r...> |
| Subject: | Re: [Caml-list] Re: The OCaml Community (aka back from the Developer Days) |
Le Monday 28 January 2008 15:42:15 Sylvain Le Gall, vous avez écrit : > On 28-01-2008, Romain Beauxis <toots@rastageeks.org> wrote: > > Le Sunday 27 January 2008 14:09:22 David Teller, vous avez écrit : > > > > Another question is who will provide machines and means to acheive it. > > In particular, a repository à la CPAN for modules would be a great thing, > > but it would have to be supported by some structure... > > Indeed, you miss one point: my company will provide resource, if needed > for it. > > For now, the computer is hired (OVH SuperPlan 08) but i don't have > enough time to set it up. > > I only plan to provide a GForge/planets/SCM repository for now. But in > the future, if anything else is required, i will be able to provide more > things to it. Wouldn't it be better to define a real structure where your company and others may take part ? For instance, kernel.org is run by a non-profit organisation, see: http://www.kernel.org/nonprofit.html The fact is that, if we don't setup strong and clear definitions of who's in charge of what or don't define a common head for the community, what will happen if any of the involved company/hacker/.... decide to split and continue alone, or simply to shutdown one machine, or claim copyright, etc... Again, I don't suspect any bad intention, but this is the only way to prevent them, isn't it ? Romain