Re: svn commit: r648381 - in /xmlgraphics/fop/trunk: ./ src/java/org/apache/fop/fo/flow/table/ src/java/org/apache/fop/layoutmgr/ src/java/org/apache/fop/layoutmgr/inline/ src/java/org/apache/fop/layo
On Apr 21, 2008, at 12:22, Vincent Hennebert wrote: My reaction was not so much triggered by this (indeed) minor issue, as by the fact that once again I was being answered “feel free to improve” when asking for cleanup/documentation, and I got tired of it. Each time, they were small issues that were not a big deal in themselves, but when combined together make the code IMO unnecessarily difficult to understand. We are dealing with a very complex piece of software, so it looks even more important to me to keep the code as clean and readable as possible. Actually I consider this to be my duty whenever I commit something, and not spending the little time this requires for that eludes me completely. FWIW: I think you do have a major point here. If it really concerns documentation, it's /always/ better if this is kept up-to-date by the dev that committed the changes in the first place. Someone else is much more likely to make errors in interpretation. Only the creator knows precisely what a certain part of the code is meant to do. Cleanup is maybe more subjective than documentation (*), but that said, some simple rules of thumb would probably not hurt here. In this last case, however, I got the impression (as Jeremias, I presume) that it was not about documentation or cleanup. I initially read it more as a suggestion --What would you think if...? As such, Jeremias' reaction was very understandable to me, and it surprised me to see it escalate further. (*) as in: My apartment is clean enough for me, but I know of people that would get a heart-attack if they entered here... ;-) Cheers Andreas
Re: svn commit: r648381 - in /xmlgraphics/fop/trunk: ./ src/java/org/apache/fop/fo/flow/table/ src/java/org/apache/fop/layoutmgr/ src/java/org/apache/fop/layoutmgr/inline/ src/java/org/apache/fop/layo
Jeremias, For what it's worth, I think you have done an extraordinary job with FOP. From my outside perspective, you have been the primary driver of the progress of the product since you came to the forefront of development. There's an inherent problem of clashing egos in OS development. I know all about that one. When that starts to happen, project productivity can dive until the conflict is sorted out. If you are feeling burnt-out, it might be time to consider tailing off your involvement in the project. Let me say, however, that on at least two occasions that I remember, Vincent has displayed a breath-taking and unwarranted arrogance. Vincent has a very high opinion of his own ability and I suspect he sees himself as the natural leader of the project. Unless Vincent develops some hitherto unsuspected humility and consideration, this difficulty can only end in one of you bowing out. That would be a pity. Jeremias Maerki wrote: On 18.04.2008 19:24:05 Vincent Hennebert wrote: Jeremias Maerki wrote: On 18.04.2008 16:51:37 Vincent Hennebert wrote: Jeremias Maerki wrote: On 18.04.2008 12:48:53 Vincent Hennebert wrote: Hi, A few comments: - some time ago I created a BreakUtil class in the o.a.f.util package. I think this class and KeepUtil should be put in the same place. Perhaps we could even merge them into a unique KeepsAndBreaksUtil class. I don’t really know what the best place would be. I put it in o.a.f.util because it already contains all sorts of utility classes, but o.a.f.layoutmgr would also make sense. WDYT? Whatever. I let you choose, but please take care of this. Whatever means: I don't care and you can fix this if it is important to you. Yeah, sure, let’s all do our own mess in our own corner and everything will be fine. I’m not asking you to finish my work, so please don’t ask me to finish yours. You created a class that’s closely related to another existing one that’s somewhere else; it’s your responsibility to try and maintain some coherence in the codebase by fixing this. Give me any good reason for not doing this simple thing, other than that you don’t care or you don’t have enough time, and I’m shutting up straight away. But you can’t call for contributors on one side and not do even the most basic cleaning behind you on the other side. Ok, let's do it this way: If one other FOP committers says that this (Vincent's idea) is something I should do, I'll do it. No discussion. Otherwise, it's 1:1 and I won't waste my time on something I don't think helps in any way. Remember, this is a democracy and a meritocracy here. http://www.apache.org/foundation/how-it-works.html#meritocracy http://www.apache.org/foundation/how-it-works.html#committers We've had a long discussion together around this last week during ApacheCon. IMO, you're going too far now. I increasingly feel like I'm your bitch. Today alone I lost almost half a day because I was too angry to work. I couldn't concentrate on what I should have been looking into. It's ok if you point out bugs and if I fix them because the bug is one of mine. I'm actually grateful for that. It's something else entirely if you have some idea and expect me to do the work. For free, notabene. I can also send you an invoice. In that case, I don't mind the additional work. OTOH, if I'm creating a mess here, maybe I should leave the project in order not to damage it any more because I care about it. Or better revert all my changes on Trunk in the last 3 years to undo the damage. Sorry for getting sarcastic, but it's not that far off. The other option: we could to switch to R-T-C: http://www.apache.org/foundation/glossary.html#ReviewThenCommit The PMC can decide to do that. That way we're always sure the community stands behind every change. But of course, you know what that would mean for the project. FOP community, if you think I drifted out of line lately, please set me straight. Vincent's voice is only one. I know this scene here is ugly and nobody wants to waste his precious free time on participating in fights between two people. The fight also doesn't help the project at all. Quite the opposite. In the case of Avalon.. Anyway, I keep finding myself in confrontations with team members from time to time. At this time, I'm seriously questioning myself and I'm not sure if that's just me and my thick head, if I care too much about the project, or if I simply have more attack area because I'm one of the most active people here. Some hints would be great (on- or off-list). Please be frank. Thanks and my apologies for the ugly scene! Jeremias Maerki (whose boss is Jeremias and to a certain degree the XML Graphics PMC, but certainly not Vincent as an individual) -- Peter B. West http://cv.pbw.id.au/ Folio http://defoe.sourceforge.net/folio/
Re: svn commit: r648381 - in /xmlgraphics/fop/trunk: ./ src/java/org/apache/fop/fo/flow/table/ src/java/org/apache/fop/layoutmgr/ src/java/org/apache/fop/layoutmgr/inline/ src/java/org/apache/fop/layo
On Fri, Apr 18, 2008 at 12:52 PM, Simon Pepping [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Easy please. Vincent has a preference. Jeremias is OK with it, but he is not hot about it, so he is not going to do it. Vincent did not add the new utilities, so he is not going to do it. That leaves Andreas to do it, or me, or ..., or it remains undone. Fortunately, that would not create a mess. Jeremias has never been in the habit of creating a mess. Nor has Vincent. But Jeremias does not code in the manner of Vincent, nor does Vincent in Jeremias' style. We have to live with that diversity. FOP is that sort of project. It benefits from that diversity, because the project has so many diverse sides to it. But the style will never be uniform. Alas? Simon Considering that Open Source project rely on many individuals working together, for better or for worse (not unlike a marriage ;-), civility and tolerance are paramount. Expression is also of great import, and it can be tough to communicate freely via email, without miscommunication occurring. That's why I generally take a moment before responding if I feel my temperature rising... I also make an effort try to send my thoughts offline to others I trust, to ensure they're not 'too hot' and cause undue issues. As far as this issue is concerned, this being FOSS, if someone has an itch to scratch, they're generally free to scratch it. Like Simon says, Jeremias doesn't feel strongly about combining/optimizing this portion of code. IMO (and apparently Simon's Jeremias') if Vincent feels a need to optimize, he can either optimize or let it lie until someone gets an urge they feel the need to scratch. Vincent, my hope is that you won't take this as 'beat up on Vincent week'. On the contrary, I think it's more about building community, and I believe all of us (even those of us who mainly lurk or are 'inactive') have valuable wants and opinions. Expression is an important part of every healthy relationship and community. Regards, The Web Maestro -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://ourlil.com/ My religion is simple. My religion is kindness. - HH The 14th Dalai Lama of Tibet
Re: svn commit: r648381 - in /xmlgraphics/fop/trunk: ./ src/java/org/apache/fop/fo/flow/table/ src/java/org/apache/fop/layoutmgr/ src/java/org/apache/fop/layoutmgr/inline/ src/java/org/apache/fop/layo
On Apr 18, 2008, at 21:52, Simon Pepping wrote: Easy please. Vincent has a preference. Jeremias is OK with it, but he is not hot about it, so he is not going to do it. Vincent did not add the new utilities, so he is not going to do it. That leaves Andreas to do it, or me, or ..., or it remains undone. My thoughts on this: a) if anyone really has a /strong/ preference to have it one way or the other, then I would expect a commit rather than a 'comment'. ;-) b) if anyone states that he does not care that much, such 'comments' are probably never going to get him to make the necessary changes anyway. At most, any further insistence would irritate him slightly. (If he were me, at least...) All fine by me if you're just raising the question to check if anyone would disagree with such a change, but as soon as the answer is: 'Whatever, go right ahead if you prefer', then, please, take the hint and either shut up and live with it, or commit the changes yourself if it is /that/ important to you. No amount of nagging about it is going to help anyone. Quite on the contrary, as we are now seeing (yet again?), if this passes a certain threshold, it starts to hurt productivity. I suggest we let the matter rest here before it grows to ridiculous proportions --if it hasn't already... After all, it's not as if it concerns any Major design decisions--, and get back to coding, helping FOP users and everything else that /really/ matters. Cheers Andreas
Re: svn commit: r648381 - in /xmlgraphics/fop/trunk: ./ src/java/org/apache/fop/fo/flow/table/ src/java/org/apache/fop/layoutmgr/ src/java/org/apache/fop/layoutmgr/inline/ src/java/org/apache/fop/layo
Simon, Peter, Clay, Andreas, Chris, thank you very much for your valuable feedback! It's reassuring to know that I'm not totally off course. Vincent, please keep the bug reports and other suggestions coming in the future. But please try to treat me as a peer. I'll do the same back. Thank you. Have a good rest of the weekend, everyone! Jeremias Maerki
Re: svn commit: r648381 - in /xmlgraphics/fop/trunk: ./ src/java/org/apache/fop/fo/flow/table/ src/java/org/apache/fop/layoutmgr/ src/java/org/apache/fop/layoutmgr/inline/ src/java/org/apache/fop/layo
We each have different ideas about what quality software means and the compromises we make with the costs associated with it. Its important to try and be tolerant and respectful and give positive reinforcement to everyone who contributes to the project. I don't think it would harm if *all* FOP developers would make a conscious effort to *try to be a little more courteous* when communicating with each other - especially when you disagree strongly on something. You can only show someone a path, you can't make them walk it. And email is a terrible cold medium to try and convey a difference of opinion - things are often interpreted in a very negative way and can escalate and turn unnecessarily nasty like it has in this situation - its important to keep in mind what a crappy medium it is at all times. These differences are best solved face to face in a pub over a beer - but alas we rarely have this pleasure :(. I'm pleased to see that most of you have not taken sides here - lets try to keep politics out of software development as much as possible - it does nothing but harm to a project. Adrian. BTW: Peter, I think you are wrong to say that Vincent is being arrogant - he just cares about the long term health of the project and is very mindful of the importance of making the codebase as conceptually simple and extensible in its structure as possible - making it easier for newbies to more effectively contribute and get involved. On 20/04/2008, Jeremias Maerki [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Simon, Peter, Clay, Andreas, Chris, thank you very much for your valuable feedback! It's reassuring to know that I'm not totally off course. Vincent, please keep the bug reports and other suggestions coming in the future. But please try to treat me as a peer. I'll do the same back. Thank you. Have a good rest of the weekend, everyone! Jeremias Maerki -- Adrian.
Re: svn commit: r648381 - in /xmlgraphics/fop/trunk: ./ src/java/org/apache/fop/fo/flow/table/ src/java/org/apache/fop/layoutmgr/ src/java/org/apache/fop/layoutmgr/inline/ src/java/org/apache/fop/layo
Hi, A few comments: - some time ago I created a BreakUtil class in the o.a.f.util package. I think this class and KeepUtil should be put in the same place. Perhaps we could even merge them into a unique KeepsAndBreaksUtil class. I don’t really know what the best place would be. I put it in o.a.f.util because it already contains all sorts of utility classes, but o.a.f.layoutmgr would also make sense. WDYT? - it would be better to create the testcases such that the rendering will become wrong if the feature is broken. For example, put the block at the bottom of the page, such that it gets deferred to the next page if keep is working, and split over 2 pages if keep is broken. Exactly like you did in block_keep-together_integers_1.xml. There are 2 reasons for this: - just because the element list looks ok doesn’t ensure that the rendering will be fine. Actually a recent post on fop-users [1] shows that. - if the generation of Knuth elements is changed somehow, all the testcases must be adapted accordingly. I had to do that several times when working on tables in the past months, and this is really painful. Tests on Knuth elements should be reserved for special situations IMO. [1] http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/xmlgraphics-fop-users/200804.mbox/[EMAIL PROTECTED] Thanks, Vincent Author: jeremias Date: Tue Apr 15 12:18:46 2008 New Revision: 648381 URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=648381view=rev Log: First part of the implementation of stage 1 for advanced keeps (see Wiki): Integer values are treated differently from always values in keep-together.within-column for all block-level FOs. split/ -- Vincent HennebertAnyware Technologies http://people.apache.org/~vhennebert http://www.anyware-tech.com Apache FOP Committer FOP Development/Consulting
Re: svn commit: r648381 - in /xmlgraphics/fop/trunk: ./ src/java/org/apache/fop/fo/flow/table/ src/java/org/apache/fop/layoutmgr/ src/java/org/apache/fop/layoutmgr/inline/ src/java/org/apache/fop/layo
Jeremias Maerki wrote: On 18.04.2008 12:48:53 Vincent Hennebert wrote: Hi, A few comments: - some time ago I created a BreakUtil class in the o.a.f.util package. I think this class and KeepUtil should be put in the same place. Perhaps we could even merge them into a unique KeepsAndBreaksUtil class. I don’t really know what the best place would be. I put it in o.a.f.util because it already contains all sorts of utility classes, but o.a.f.layoutmgr would also make sense. WDYT? Whatever. I let you choose, but please take care of this. - it would be better to create the testcases such that the rendering will become wrong if the feature is broken. For example, put the block at the bottom of the page, such that it gets deferred to the next page if keep is working, and split over 2 pages if keep is broken. Exactly like you did in block_keep-together_integers_1.xml. There are 2 reasons for this: - just because the element list looks ok doesn’t ensure that the rendering will be fine. Actually a recent post on fop-users [1] shows that. We've had the other case, too: Rendering looked fine but the element list was wrong and lead to bad break decisions. I'm not sure if your example is a good one. At least it shows that testing only one thing is not enough. - if the generation of Knuth elements is changed somehow, all the testcases must be adapted accordingly. I had to do that several times when working on tables in the past months, and this is really painful. Tests on Knuth elements should be reserved for special situations IMO. I'm doing unit testing here, or at least as unit testing as possible. What you're talking about is component testing and larger. I want to make sure that the element list is correct and I trust that the breaking algorithm does the right thing because it is already tested elsewhere. I completely disagree that element list test should be reserved for special situations. Or else this is exactly such a special situation for me. Fair enough. Vincent -- Vincent HennebertAnyware Technologies http://people.apache.org/~vhennebert http://www.anyware-tech.com Apache FOP Committer FOP Development/Consulting
Re: svn commit: r648381 - in /xmlgraphics/fop/trunk: ./ src/java/org/apache/fop/fo/flow/table/ src/java/org/apache/fop/layoutmgr/ src/java/org/apache/fop/layoutmgr/inline/ src/java/org/apache/fop/layo
On 18.04.2008 16:51:37 Vincent Hennebert wrote: Jeremias Maerki wrote: On 18.04.2008 12:48:53 Vincent Hennebert wrote: Hi, A few comments: - some time ago I created a BreakUtil class in the o.a.f.util package. I think this class and KeepUtil should be put in the same place. Perhaps we could even merge them into a unique KeepsAndBreaksUtil class. I don’t really know what the best place would be. I put it in o.a.f.util because it already contains all sorts of utility classes, but o.a.f.layoutmgr would also make sense. WDYT? Whatever. I let you choose, but please take care of this. Whatever means: I don't care and you can fix this if it is important to you. snip/ Jeremias Maerki
Re: svn commit: r648381 - in /xmlgraphics/fop/trunk: ./ src/java/org/apache/fop/fo/flow/table/ src/java/org/apache/fop/layoutmgr/ src/java/org/apache/fop/layoutmgr/inline/ src/java/org/apache/fop/layo
Jeremias Maerki wrote: On 18.04.2008 16:51:37 Vincent Hennebert wrote: Jeremias Maerki wrote: On 18.04.2008 12:48:53 Vincent Hennebert wrote: Hi, A few comments: - some time ago I created a BreakUtil class in the o.a.f.util package. I think this class and KeepUtil should be put in the same place. Perhaps we could even merge them into a unique KeepsAndBreaksUtil class. I don’t really know what the best place would be. I put it in o.a.f.util because it already contains all sorts of utility classes, but o.a.f.layoutmgr would also make sense. WDYT? Whatever. I let you choose, but please take care of this. Whatever means: I don't care and you can fix this if it is important to you. Yeah, sure, let’s all do our own mess in our own corner and everything will be fine. I’m not asking you to finish my work, so please don’t ask me to finish yours. You created a class that’s closely related to another existing one that’s somewhere else; it’s your responsibility to try and maintain some coherence in the codebase by fixing this. Give me any good reason for not doing this simple thing, other than that you don’t care or you don’t have enough time, and I’m shutting up straight away. But you can’t call for contributors on one side and not do even the most basic cleaning behind you on the other side. Vincent -- Vincent HennebertAnyware Technologies http://people.apache.org/~vhennebert http://www.anyware-tech.com Apache FOP Committer FOP Development/Consulting
Re: svn commit: r648381 - in /xmlgraphics/fop/trunk: ./ src/java/org/apache/fop/fo/flow/table/ src/java/org/apache/fop/layoutmgr/ src/java/org/apache/fop/layoutmgr/inline/ src/java/org/apache/fop/layo
On 18.04.2008 19:24:05 Vincent Hennebert wrote: Jeremias Maerki wrote: On 18.04.2008 16:51:37 Vincent Hennebert wrote: Jeremias Maerki wrote: On 18.04.2008 12:48:53 Vincent Hennebert wrote: Hi, A few comments: - some time ago I created a BreakUtil class in the o.a.f.util package. I think this class and KeepUtil should be put in the same place. Perhaps we could even merge them into a unique KeepsAndBreaksUtil class. I don’t really know what the best place would be. I put it in o.a.f.util because it already contains all sorts of utility classes, but o.a.f.layoutmgr would also make sense. WDYT? Whatever. I let you choose, but please take care of this. Whatever means: I don't care and you can fix this if it is important to you. Yeah, sure, let’s all do our own mess in our own corner and everything will be fine. I’m not asking you to finish my work, so please don’t ask me to finish yours. You created a class that’s closely related to another existing one that’s somewhere else; it’s your responsibility to try and maintain some coherence in the codebase by fixing this. Give me any good reason for not doing this simple thing, other than that you don’t care or you don’t have enough time, and I’m shutting up straight away. But you can’t call for contributors on one side and not do even the most basic cleaning behind you on the other side. Ok, let's do it this way: If one other FOP committers says that this (Vincent's idea) is something I should do, I'll do it. No discussion. Otherwise, it's 1:1 and I won't waste my time on something I don't think helps in any way. Remember, this is a democracy and a meritocracy here. http://www.apache.org/foundation/how-it-works.html#meritocracy http://www.apache.org/foundation/how-it-works.html#committers We've had a long discussion together around this last week during ApacheCon. IMO, you're going too far now. I increasingly feel like I'm your bitch. Today alone I lost almost half a day because I was too angry to work. I couldn't concentrate on what I should have been looking into. It's ok if you point out bugs and if I fix them because the bug is one of mine. I'm actually grateful for that. It's something else entirely if you have some idea and expect me to do the work. For free, notabene. I can also send you an invoice. In that case, I don't mind the additional work. OTOH, if I'm creating a mess here, maybe I should leave the project in order not to damage it any more because I care about it. Or better revert all my changes on Trunk in the last 3 years to undo the damage. Sorry for getting sarcastic, but it's not that far off. The other option: we could to switch to R-T-C: http://www.apache.org/foundation/glossary.html#ReviewThenCommit The PMC can decide to do that. That way we're always sure the community stands behind every change. But of course, you know what that would mean for the project. FOP community, if you think I drifted out of line lately, please set me straight. Vincent's voice is only one. I know this scene here is ugly and nobody wants to waste his precious free time on participating in fights between two people. The fight also doesn't help the project at all. Quite the opposite. In the case of Avalon.. Anyway, I keep finding myself in confrontations with team members from time to time. At this time, I'm seriously questioning myself and I'm not sure if that's just me and my thick head, if I care too much about the project, or if I simply have more attack area because I'm one of the most active people here. Some hints would be great (on- or off-list). Please be frank. Thanks and my apologies for the ugly scene! Jeremias Maerki (whose boss is Jeremias and to a certain degree the XML Graphics PMC, but certainly not Vincent as an individual)
Re: svn commit: r648381 - in /xmlgraphics/fop/trunk: ./ src/java/org/apache/fop/fo/flow/table/ src/java/org/apache/fop/layoutmgr/ src/java/org/apache/fop/layoutmgr/inline/ src/java/org/apache/fop/layo
Easy please. Vincent has a preference. Jeremias is OK with it, but he is not hot about it, so he is not going to do it. Vincent did not add the new utilities, so he is not going to do it. That leaves Andreas to do it, or me, or ..., or it remains undone. Fortunately, that would not create a mess. Jeremias has never been in the habit of creating a mess. Nor has Vincent. But Jeremias does not code in the manner of Vincent, nor does Vincent in Jeremias' style. We have to live with that diversity. FOP is that sort of project. It benefits from that diversity, because the project has so many diverse sides to it. But the style will never be uniform. Alas? Simon On Fri, Apr 18, 2008 at 09:14:01PM +0200, Jeremias Maerki wrote: On 18.04.2008 19:24:05 Vincent Hennebert wrote: Jeremias Maerki wrote: On 18.04.2008 16:51:37 Vincent Hennebert wrote: Jeremias Maerki wrote: On 18.04.2008 12:48:53 Vincent Hennebert wrote: Hi, A few comments: - some time ago I created a BreakUtil class in the o.a.f.util package. I think this class and KeepUtil should be put in the same place. Perhaps we could even merge them into a unique KeepsAndBreaksUtil class. I don???t really know what the best place would be. I put it in o.a.f.util because it already contains all sorts of utility classes, but o.a.f.layoutmgr would also make sense. WDYT? Whatever. I let you choose, but please take care of this. Whatever means: I don't care and you can fix this if it is important to you. Ok, let's do it this way: If one other FOP committers says that this (Vincent's idea) is something I should do, I'll do it. No discussion. Otherwise, it's 1:1 and I won't waste my time on something I don't think helps in any way. Remember, this is a democracy and a meritocracy here. -- Simon Pepping home page: http://www.leverkruid.eu
