On Thu, Dec 23, 2010 at 7:58 AM, Mike McQuaid <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 23 December 2010 12:43, David Cole <[email protected]> wrote: > > Neither do we: > > http://public.kitware.com/Bug/view.php?id=10067 > > > As always, as developers we find ourselves constantly working to improve > > what we have: fixing bugs, implementing new features, answering questions > on > > the mailing list, blogging/communicating about it, adding examples and > > suggestions to the Wiki. > > > > The struggle is reserving enough time to contribute to documentation when > > there are always "real" (functional) bugs to be fixed. Perpetual > questions: > > what's "enough" documentation?, how do we make sure people can find it > > easily?, how do we name this better (but still preserve the existing > names > > for people already using it / backwards compatibility)? > > > I make no excuses here: yes, the CPack and CTest documentation are > lacking / > > lagging behind the CMake documentation. However, it will take a very real > > and concerted and time-consuming effort to improve the situation. With > the > > open source nature of the project, we have to be willing to accept the > > organic growth that occurs in the code base: the documentation will be > the > > same: it will improve gradually, over time, as contributors are able to > > improve it. > > I think the main problem is that you make it very hard for people to > contribute. KDE and Homebrew (two other open-source projects I've > written a lot of code for over the years) make this very easy. > > How do we make it very hard? What about KDE and Homebrew make this very easy? Specifics, please. Kitware is great, you clearly write good code and have done a great > job creating CMake and CPack. They are fantastic tools. However, I > think until you are more encouraging of external developers you will > struggle to make huge improvements to CMake. > Thank you. Even with more external developers, I think we'll struggle -- that would just be a different sort of struggle. > > Until then, at least the mailing list has a reasonable response rate and, > it > > seems, sufficient participation from knowledgeable folks willing to pitch > in > > and answer. So... if you're confused about something, please ask here. > > We (I hope I speak for all CMake devs, here) take no offense. We welcome > > discussion, always. > > The mailing list is OK but most people don't want to sign up to a > mailing list and receive lots of emails that have nothing to do with > them. I'm only signed up because I want to try and get some patches > merged and was told that I should discuss things here rather than the > bugtracker. > > I hope I don't cause any offense here either. I'm passionate about > CMake because I like the tool and want to make it better. > > Again, let me stress, no offense taken. There is no way you can offend me, unless you start calling me names for no reason. Reasonable discussion always welcome. Thx, David > -- > Mike McQuaid > http://mikemcquaid.com >
_______________________________________________ Powered by www.kitware.com Visit other Kitware open-source projects at http://www.kitware.com/opensource/opensource.html Please keep messages on-topic and check the CMake FAQ at: http://www.cmake.org/Wiki/CMake_FAQ Follow this link to subscribe/unsubscribe: http://www.cmake.org/mailman/listinfo/cmake
