<html><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; "><br><div><div>On Mar 17, 2008, at 5:39 PM, Massimo Cesaro wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><blockquote type="cite"><br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Mon, Mar 17, 2008 at 11:38 AM, Torbjorn Tornkvist <<a href="mailto:tobbe@tornkvist.org">tobbe@tornkvist.org</a>> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"> <br> It is now 10 years (I think...) since Erlang became Open Source.<br> The last year, the interest in Erlang has exploded and I think<br> it is time to take the next step; open up the development of Erlang.<br> </blockquote></div><br>Please help me to understand: What are the real benefits in doing this?<br>Erlang and OTP are a good example of conceptual integrity, mostly because they are designed to solve real world problems; what are the benefits in allowing, for example, the forking of the build tree? <br> The language and its libraries are not static, they are maintained by Ericsson in a win-win situation for the end user. Until now, the Erlang maintainers were quite responsive to the Erlang community requests, and the overall quality of their releases is close to excellence.<br> Sure, maybe accessing the Erlang bug tracking system could be really useful, but all the bugs signaled to the mailing list are at least acknowledged by the developers.<br>The EEP initiative also contribute to the development of the language, and although someone criticized it, I still have to find another development tool which is so well documented.<br> I'm not an expert in the management of open source projects, but what could the Erlang users gain from the bazaar?<br><br></blockquote></div><br><div>End users could benefit from an earlie adoption of libraries like Starling (ICU binding) and erlycairo. </div></body></html>