Glad to see interest on this topic here again after a while. Some miscellaneous thoughts given that and the time that’s elapsed:
- I think @yawaramin is correct that expecting/hoping/waiting for further input from antron is probably not productive.
- I don’t think there’s any actual IP challenges around the “dream” name; antron [to his credit] never even claimed it as a common law trademark AFAICT (though I really don’t think it’s particularly important what the project’s name is going forward).
- [EDIT: removed this point in favour of a more developed reply here re: package namespacing/scoping in opam]
- Maybe @jayeshbhoot et al. have a different take, but it feels like a library (or a category) as opinionated as dream / web frameworks might not be at home in the ocaml-community group? i.e. as seen in other language communities, there are literally hundreds of ways to skin a “web framework”; I’d hate to see dream being a part of ocaml-community dissuade others from promulgating their take on the category.
I’ve been edging towards “publishing” my own fork of dream for a while (whether to opam or simply via suggesting it as a new viable HEAD), but am happy to not do that insofar as more active community contributors have a head of steam on it.