Just for the record, [email protected] also happens to be list where the
members of the Caml Consortium discuss their issues. There's potentially
private/sensitive information in there, and it's not always clear what
relates to the consortium member's interests, and what is more about
language design. So having a third list just to discuss language design
issues is not as easy as it seems.
Cheers,
jonathan
On 12/09/2011 12:17 PM, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
On Fri, Dec 09, 2011 at 12:03:30PM +0100, Gabriel Scherer wrote:
when discussion programming language matters, there is usually an
extraordinary amount of bike-shedding
<snip>
I would love, for example, a kind of read-only mode where we hear
about the discussion, without adding noise to it
Well, *if* this is the problem, then the solutions to it are well known
and adopted by other communities that maintain programming languages:
just add a "core-dev" mailing list, where only list members could post,
and someone who moderates subscription requests. Such a think will also
help defining who the core team are and give some sort of public reward
to who makes into it. Given that (as discussed in this threader) there
already OCaml committers who are not affiliated to INRIA, that would
also dispel the feeling that OCaml is an INRIA pet.
( Now probably Benedikt will probably want to kill both me and Gabriel
for thread hijack, *again* :-))
--
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
