oliver <[email protected]> writes:
> Hello,
>
>
> during the last years, more than one person mourned about
> this or that dark sides of OCaml.
>
> Even some of the mourning and the proposals had mentioned good ideas and had
> positive motivation, after a while it became clear, that the same people with
> the one or the other good idea, failed badly in other areas. Good, that they
> did not have had too much influence in the development of OCaml.
>
> Even in general I like the community/bazaar, I think in case of OCaml,
> there is a lot of high knowledge in the core team, which was criticized
> by others already, but in the long run, it turned out that the core team
> had their reasons for a lot of decisions, which were criticized.
> Ocaml of course will also have some history-related issues that might be
> changed, but maybe also a lot of decisions inside, which relies on theoretical
> reasoning.
That is no excuse for not reacting to bug or feature patches. If
there is a reason not to accept a patch then that can be communicated.
There is no excuse for silence.
MfG
Goswin
--
Caml-list mailing list. Subscription management and archives:
https://sympa-roc.inria.fr/wws/info/caml-list
Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners
Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs
