On Thu, Dec 2, 2010 at 2:51 AM, Gavin Simpson <gavin.simp...@ucl.ac.uk>wrote:
> On Wed, 2010-12-01 at 20:24 -0500, Dominick Samperi wrote: > <snip /> > > > Just to be clear I have never used the package and am not truly > > > commenting on this particular case but only the general ideas in this > > > thread. Also I was not suggesting that the comments in the code were > > > purposefully misleading, only that they might be misleading since they > > > could be interpreted in terms of contribution even though they are > > > stated in terms of lines of code. The author of the phrase may very > > > well have felt that the current team had done a lot of work to add > > > design ideas and develop and promote the software but perhaps the > > > unfortunate way in how it was expressed in that phrase that came out > > > as a seeming comment on the original creator's contribution rather > > > than the intended comment on their own, presumably also significant, > > > contribution. > > > > > > > There is no reason given why this > > should happen now, at this moment, and no explanation why > > the same standard should not be applied to other package authors, > > including other authors of Rcpp. > > Dominick, > > You feel you are the aggrieved party so of course you will find > conspiracy in the timing. An equally plausible explanation is that the > current set of developers on Rcpp intended to alter the "contributions", > to better reflect the current state of the package, some time ago but it > slipped through the cracks. > While we are in the housecleaning mood, perhaps the "contributions" can be reflected even better by removing all references to my name as I have suggested. > > You are predisposed to see the bad where non may exist. But also, you > should be discussing this in private with the package developers. > > There is nothing in this thread of relevance to R-devel (other than to > publicly refute your claims so as to balance the record should someone > come across this in the archives) as this has nothing to do with > developing R. There is no-one here who can speak for the "R Community", > because such a thing is not a concrete entity - you will just get the > opinions of individuals. It is to the credit of this list (R-Devel) that > this has not descended into a vitriolic stream of claim and counter > claim. > > As for your claims about R Core, Doug has succinctly and clearly > addressed your claims in that regard, regardless what you may personally > believe. Rcpp is *not* an official product of the R Foundation, and > neither is it part of the R distribution. > > Can we please take this elsewhere? > > Gavin. > > > This is not about this particular case, it is about "general ideas" > > along the lines of your original post. > > > > Thanks, > > Dominick > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > Statistics & Software Consulting > > > GKX Group, GKX Associates Inc. > > > tel: 1-877-GKX-GROUP > > > email: ggrothendieck at gmail.com > > > > > > > [[alternative HTML version deleted]] > > > > ______________________________________________ > > R-devel@r-project.org mailing list > > https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel > > -- > %~%~%~%~%~%~%~%~%~%~%~%~%~%~%~%~%~%~%~%~%~%~%~%~%~%~%~%~%~%~%~%~%~%~% > Dr. Gavin Simpson [t] +44 (0)20 7679 0522 > ECRC, UCL Geography, [f] +44 (0)20 7679 0565 > Pearson Building, [e] gavin.simpsonATNOSPAMucl.ac.uk > Gower Street, London [w] > http://www.ucl.ac.uk/~ucfagls/<http://www.ucl.ac.uk/%7Eucfagls/> > UK. WC1E 6BT. [w] http://www.freshwaters.org.uk > %~%~%~%~%~%~%~%~%~%~%~%~%~%~%~%~%~%~%~%~%~%~%~%~%~%~%~%~%~%~%~%~%~%~% > > [[alternative HTML version deleted]] ______________________________________________ R-devel@r-project.org mailing list https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
