English version
Accueil     À propos     Téléchargement     Ressources     Contactez-nous    

Ce site est rarement mis à jour. Pour les informations les plus récentes, rendez-vous sur le nouveau site OCaml à l'adresse ocaml.org.

Browse thread
Book sales
[ Home ] [ Index: by date | by threads ]
[ Search: ]

[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
Date: 2007-05-23 (09:21)
From: Oliver Bandel <oliver@f...>
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Book sales
On Tue, May 22, 2007 at 09:47:06PM -0700, Paul Snively wrote:
> Since we seem to be airing our opinions here, I'd like to take the  
> opportunity to add mine.
> I purchased Jon Harrop's book, am glad that I did,

I didn't say the book is a bad one.
It was to expensive for me, so I asked a local university library to buy it.
So I could read it. Yes, I like the book also.
And it's ok to mention it. But if it's mentioned in nearly every mail,
then it's obssessive and might annoy the reader, who is here to read about
OCaml. Reading about OCaml in commercial applications is interesting for me,
but thies IMHO does not include books (as commercial products) about the language.

> By contrast, Dr. Harrop's critics seem to take issue with the notion  
> that Dr. Harrop might actually make a profit, either directly or  
> indirectly, from this.


> While I appreciate that the list is primarily  
> a mutual information-sharing resource, I have difficulty seeing  
> anything wrong with periodically informing people that there is at  
> least one commercial resource available for those such as myself who  
> desire it.

It can be put on webpages with links to OCaml-references, and I think
it already is.

When I google with "books on OCaml" it's on the first result page and
one of the first links also.

So, it would be fine if these mail-based advertising pop-ups
could be abandoned. They are unnecessary and also annoying.

> In any case, for those who feel that way, it would seem  
> that the simple solution of filtering Dr. Harrop's messages would be  
> sufficient recourse.

This is no option, because Jon's answers often are also well informing.
But the advertising is nevertheless annoying.