RE: [CMake] Wee question about CMake developer etiquette
Of course, this doesn't identifies the project leaders, but at least gives an idea of who has typed enough lines of code to earn the right to speak for a project. Actually it identifies who committed enough lines ... which is not quite the same as writing them. For CMake the Utilities directories have a lot of code but we did not write most of it. But I'll agree the general idea holds ;) Ken ___ CMake mailing list CMake@cmake.org http://www.cmake.org/mailman/listinfo/cmake
Re: [CMake] Wee question about CMake developer etiquette
On Monday 11 February 2008, KHMan wrote: ... As it is, I have tried to look for a list of key developers, but since the project is identified more with the company, I was unable to find a list of key developers easily. I looked at the website and tarball, but didn't manage to get a clear answer. The cmake developers are: -core developers: Bill, Brad and Ken -everybody with a @kitware.com email address And some more contributors, AFAIK all of them are maintaining cmake based buildsystems for their respective project, e.g. Alan Irwin, Andreas Schneider, Eric Wing and myself. Brandon is an active user (as you can see on this mailing list), but no cmake developer or endorsed by the cmake developers or something like that. Alex ___ CMake mailing list CMake@cmake.org http://www.cmake.org/mailman/listinfo/cmake
Re: [CMake] Wee question about CMake developer etiquette
Hello Kein-Hong Man, At 2/9/2008 10:27 PM, KHMan wrote: I have a small question to pose to you guys (ladies and gentlemen alike) on etiquette: Is it normal for a CMake developer to jump into another mailing list and generally act in an obnoxious manner and act aggressively or provocatively? No, it's obviously not, this would be very regrettable. There is only a handful of CMake *developers*, and all of them are at Kitware (i.e. @kitware.com); they (and people in our company in general) would absolutely *not* act in such way. If, as I suspect, somebody is posing as a CMake developer and acting in an unprofessional manner, then you should point out the problem (and culprit) to us. Thank you ___ CMake mailing list CMake@cmake.org http://www.cmake.org/mailman/listinfo/cmake
Re: [CMake] Wee question about CMake developer etiquette
On Feb 10, 2008 3:05 AM, Sebastien BARRE [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If, as I suspect, somebody is posing as a CMake developer and acting in an unprofessional manner, then you should point out the problem (and culprit) to us. It was me. Can't say I've ever ticked people off on a mailing list, been called to account by 1 person in private, resolved that with a degree of politeness, let the thread die, and then had that person follow me around the internet to other venues. Kien-Hong Man, I don't speak for CMake, I speak for myself. If I ever used the word we, I meant the CMake community. In context it was probably appropriate. You are showing an unwillingness to agree to disagree, and you are forgetting your own statement that I mean well. Do you mean well? Cheers, Brandon Van Every ___ CMake mailing list CMake@cmake.org http://www.cmake.org/mailman/listinfo/cmake
Re: [CMake] Wee question about CMake developer etiquette
I apologized on the Lua list. ___ CMake mailing list CMake@cmake.org http://www.cmake.org/mailman/listinfo/cmake
Re: [CMake] Wee question about CMake developer etiquette
Brandon Van Every wrote: On Feb 10, 2008 3:05 AM, Sebastien BARRE [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If, as I suspect, somebody is posing as a CMake developer and acting in an unprofessional manner, then you should point out the problem (and culprit) to us. It was me. Can't say I've ever ticked people off on a mailing list, been called to account by 1 person in private, resolved that with a degree of politeness, let the thread die, and then had that person follow me around the internet to other venues. Kien-Hong Man, I don't speak for CMake, I speak for myself. If I ever used the word we, I meant the CMake community. In context it was probably appropriate. You are showing an unwillingness to agree to disagree, and you are forgetting your own statement that I mean well. Do you mean well? Sorry for the delay, I was off my keyboard over the weekend. I don't wish to prolong this thread any more than anyone else, so I'll just try to explain what needs to be explained from my side and that's it. Brandon apologizing in the Lua list is a correct decision on his part (thank you for doing the right thing), and that list is getting to normal, but my query is in the context of CMake. Yes, obviously this can be misconstrued as petty, et cetera. I apologize to those who think I am polluting this list. But there are important reasons for me to seek clarification. The Lua postings in question can probably be found at: http://lua-users.org/lists/lua-l/ It was important for me to seek clarification because CMake is one of the main upcoming next-generation build systems. If I chose to consider Qt/KDE 4 over say, wxWidgets, then I will probably have to use CMake. Brandon's postings certainly gave me the impression that he was partly in charge in some manner. Thus, someone who is under the impression that a CMake lead developer did jump into a public mailing list of another project and said the things he did, would be extremely concerned about whether the CMake project is led by good leaders or not. (On some lists, top or lead developers might post and choose not to make a big deal of their status, so such conclusions are reasonable, and the Lua list is very diverse.) Moreover, CMake is led by a company and is a project of which I have heard a lot of good things about so far, so this episode is even more unusual and shocking in that sense. So Brandon explaining his behaviour with the phrase I mean well is immaterial. I accept that it part of Brandon's style. I am seeking clarification with the CMake project whether such behaviour exists among the lead developers, because it was not clear to me what Brandon's position is in your system. If Brandon is in fact a main developer, then I will need to reconsider CMake's reputation in my list of build systems accordingly. From looking at this list's archives and from current replies, this list (and project) seems pretty normal to me. But the conduct of a project's developers also includes what they do in the name of the project outside of this list and this project's activities. As this is a public mailing list open to anyone, I think it is fair for me to ask for that clarification, because it concerns the integrity of CMake, and a project is at least partly defined by its developers. Thank you to those who are reading this. I will do my best to avoid posting on this thread again unless it is absolutely necessary, so I apologize if I don't reply to some postings regarding this matter. -- Cheers, Kein-Hong Man (esq.) Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia ___ CMake mailing list CMake@cmake.org http://www.cmake.org/mailman/listinfo/cmake
Re: [CMake] Wee question about CMake developer etiquette
Sebastien BARRE wrote: Hello Kein-Hong Man, At 2/9/2008 10:27 PM, KHMan wrote: I have a small question to pose to you guys (ladies and gentlemen alike) on etiquette: Is it normal for a CMake developer to jump into another mailing list and generally act in an obnoxious manner and act aggressively or provocatively? No, it's obviously not, this would be very regrettable. There is only a handful of CMake *developers*, and all of them are at Kitware (i.e. @kitware.com); they (and people in our company in general) would absolutely *not* act in such way. If, as I suspect, somebody is posing as a CMake developer and acting in an unprofessional manner, then you should point out the problem (and culprit) to us. I think some of the questions have been answered by other postings, so things are clearer in my mind. Thanks for the quick reply. As it is, I have tried to look for a list of key developers, but since the project is identified more with the company, I was unable to find a list of key developers easily. I looked at the website and tarball, but didn't manage to get a clear answer. So from other postings and musings, I gather Brandon does not speak for Kitware in any way and thus I am relieved for that. I think that clarification settles things for me. Thank you, -- Cheers, Kein-Hong Man (esq.) Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia ___ CMake mailing list CMake@cmake.org http://www.cmake.org/mailman/listinfo/cmake
Re: [CMake] Wee question about CMake developer etiquette
On Feb 10, 2008 10:54 PM, KHMan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Brandon's postings certainly gave me the impression that he was partly in charge in some manner. As I said previously, I do not speak for CMake. I understand why you had the impression: I speak forcefully, I currently value CMake over Lua, I spend too much time arguing the merits and demerits of build systems rather than discussing Lua, I'm capable of zealously, and I used the word we at least once to indicate that I am a part of the CMake community. I apologized for my zealousy, particularly with respect to hobbyists, whose contributions to Open Source I have undervalued. None of this, however, makes me a Kitware developer, and I have never claimed to be such. You are very protective of your Lua community. You are also aware that I am not the only source of flames in that community. I think you need to accept that in an open source culture, people will debate issues and they will disagree with each other. Sometimes in flaming fashion. Thus, someone who is under the impression that a CMake lead developer did jump into a public mailing list of another project and said the things he did, would be extremely concerned about whether the CMake project is led by good leaders or not. For the record, Bill Hoffman is a political saint. You could never have a man with more diplomatic aplomb. Moreover, CMake is led by a company and is a project of which I have heard a lot of good things about so far, so this episode is even more unusual and shocking in that sense. I do not know what the right strategy is for promoting CMake. I am not skilled at making people feel good about things, and I find discussion of CMake vs. Premake vs. Bou very, very frustrating. Premake and Bou are both Lua-based. They eschew CMake, and they eschew each other! One of the ongoing conundrums of Open Source is the duplication of work. The most famous split is probably GNU Emacs vs. XEmacs, it was very bitter. It is probably premature to condemn Premake and Bou as hopeless cases of Not Invented Here. It is probably better to look at them as experiments. Lately I've been trying to learn about such experiments, to see if they're smarter than we (the CMake community) are. I am encouraged that at least in some Open Source communities, authors of similar tools sometimes do combine efforts to make a better, single tool. This has happened with JRake and Raven, 2 build tools inspired by Ruby's Rake build tool. http://offthelip.org/?p=44 So Brandon explaining his behaviour with the phrase I mean well is immaterial. It was your explanation, not mine. I agreed with your explanation. I think your choice of words is material. You have also sought to explain me as Machiavellian. I acquiesced to that explanation in order to bring peace. Cheers, Brandon Van Every ___ CMake mailing list CMake@cmake.org http://www.cmake.org/mailman/listinfo/cmake
Re: [CMake] Wee question about CMake developer etiquette
On 2008-02-10 11:27+0800 KHMan wrote: Hi all, I have a small question to pose to you guys (ladies and gentlemen alike) on etiquette: Is it normal for a CMake developer to jump into another mailing list and generally act in an obnoxious manner and act aggressively or provocatively? Based on my experience here, I completely doubt it. Normally this is a friendly list, and I find the small but dedicated band of CMake developers helpful to me and many others. There are a number of disagreements here (what healthy open-source software does not have a variety of opinions about it?), but they are usually solved amicably. I wonder if your list has run into one over-the-top CMake user rather than an actual CMake developer? Alan __ Alan W. Irwin Astronomical research affiliation with Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Victoria (astrowww.phys.uvic.ca). Programming affiliations with the FreeEOS equation-of-state implementation for stellar interiors (freeeos.sf.net); PLplot scientific plotting software package (plplot.org); the libLASi project (unifont.org/lasi); the Loads of Linux Links project (loll.sf.net); and the Linux Brochure Project (lbproject.sf.net). __ Linux-powered Science __ ___ CMake mailing list CMake@cmake.org http://www.cmake.org/mailman/listinfo/cmake
