[ocaml-infra] [Caml-list] Working Group: the future of syntax extensions in OCaml, after camlp4

[Anil Madhavapeddy]

On 25 Jan 2013, at 20:48, Ashish Agarwal <agarwal1975 at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 11:10 AM, Anil Madhavapeddy <anil at recoil.org> wrote:
>  
> > what's the best way to reflect this on ocaml.org?
> >
> > Do you mean to publicize the groups? We've had some discussion [1] about a User Groups page, which could be generalized to groups of all sorts, perhaps split into different sections. Working groups could all be listed here with a description and links to their mailing lists, etc. Actually, this resolves the problem we were having that currently there are not enough groups to justify a whole separate page.
> 
> It's not quite a user group though... it's more to get some reasonable consensus and well-thought out patches to propose upstream without lots of different opinions preventing anything from being merged.
> 
> So do you mean you'd rather not list the working groups on ocaml.org? Or not in the place I suggested?

I'd definitely like to list them on ocaml.org, but I think they could use their own dedicated space somewhere.

One reason is to have a dedicated page per group is to aggregate blog activity around a particular topic, and rebuild them just as we do for the main blog RSS feed.  I was thinking that tagging a blog (e.g. like Leo's [1]) with wg:camlp4 should be enough to get it picked up and listed there.

Additionally the chairs might want to update it with recent activity and proposals.  This is particularly true for big ones like camlp4 that are going to take a while and require cross-cutting changes.

So...not particularly concrete thoughts, but at the same time, hiding it with the user groups probably isn't the right answer.  Amir, any thoughts on structure here?

-anil

[1] http://www.lpw25.net/2013/01/23/camlp4-alternative-part-1.html