On 16-01-17 18:16, Dick Hollenbeck wrote:
> On 01/15/2017 09:36 AM, Xen wrote:
>> Dick Hollenbeck schreef op 12-01-2017 23:00:
>>
>>> Anyone a CMake guru out there?
>>
>> I think you should keep things calm and not change for the sake of 
>> change.
>>
>> Stability is important. Being dependable, being able to depend on the 
>> well known is important.
>>
>> Stop messing with the status quo to no avail. It is good the way it is, 
>> you know. The more chaos you put in, the more chaos you get out.
>>
>> I should know :p.
>>
>> That's all I can say here.
> 
> 
> You haven't said anything; except that you do not understand that software 
> development is
> change and growth.
> 
> I am a software developer.  I ran the open source KiCad project for 7 years, 
> taking it
> from an unusable tar ball to team of thousands of users and over 500 
> developers on the
> developer's mailing list.   That mailing list is up even more now.
> 
> By contrast, there has not been one posting on a vuurmuur developer's mailing 
> list in over
> 2 years:
> 
>     https://sourceforge.net/p/vuurmuur/mailman/vuurmuur-devel/
> 
> I also wrote much of the software that controls the largest power plants in 
> the USA.  And
> I've owned software company for 34 years.
> 
> Victor recently asked if anyone wanted to help him.  That is a tremendous 
> first step in
> developing a culture beyond one individual.  Then, however, the door was 
> shut.  When asked
> specifically if he would accept a contribution (before time was spent on it) 
> he failed to
> answer in the affirmative.  This is a mistake.  An hour reading about CMake 
> and then an
> affirmative answer might have gotten a contribution from me.  Sometimes you 
> have to

The mistake you are making here is that asking for ppl to get involved
doesn't mean I can't be picky about what to accept, reject, stimulate or
discourage.

I had just cleaned up and refactored the current build system to a point
where I'm satisfied, so it's now low on my list. There are other things
that I would like to talk about much more, things like the quality of
the rules we generate, nftables support, improvements to the gui/tui
workflow, etc.

That said, I did say that if someone wanted to do the work I might
reconsider. But I do also give the warning that is not high on *my* list.

> compromise as a project leader, just to grow culture and spirit within the 
> project, to
> grow the life in the project.  I hand picked my project leader replacement in 
> the KiCad
> project for excellence in this very important personality trait.

Gee, isn't that nice? How about honesty for a personality trait? I just
gave you my opinion, and you respond with a flame.


> CMake is not chaos.  CMake is an improvement to the project, and would be a 
> requirement of
> any open source project for which I would ever volunteer for again.
> 
> I do indeed have the expertise to create a CMake build system, and could do 
> it in 120
> minutes.  However my question was very purposeful.  I wanted to know how 
> healthy this
> project is, and to get a read on what the depth of interest in it is, so I 
> could measure
> the likely return on any investment that I might make in its development or 
> use.
> 
> There are often a number of young people who lurk on a development mailing 
> list that have
> development capabilities and who want to get more involved.  This was me 
> throwing bait
> into a pond, seeing how much life was in the water.  120 minutes for me is 
> expensive, by
> contrast 120 minutes for a junior in college is less than expensive, it is an 
> opportunity
> to add something to his/her resume.
> 
> 
>>
>> I mean you suggest a solution but then you require a "guru" to actually 
>> implement it for you. That doesn't sound as easy as you make it appear 
>> to be. That suggests there is going to be a lot of effort required to 
>> make it reasonably stable, get everyone (including the main developer) 
>> acquainted etc. etc. etc. and for what benefit?
>>
>> It's just sake for the sake of change, that's all.
> 
> 
> I do not agree.  Autotools is crap.  Nobody should be using at this point.
> 
> A large number of new projects and many existing projects are choosing CMake 
> over
> autotools, it is not a difficult decision to make, nor to see the superiority.
> 
> Often a project will keep two build systems in play until a level of comfort 
> is
> established on the newer one.
> 
> But at this point I think it is moot.  I think Victor was making a half baked 
> attempt at
> convincing even himself that the project warranted any more time of his own 
> time.  Open
> source can cause burn out, and the rewards are very very thin, I empathize.
> Even after a project reaches critical mass with multiple talented 
> contributors, that
> often becomes a shouting match.

There are a lot of misguided assumptions here about me and the project.

Since we're lecturing each other, I have 2 tips for you:

1. don't start lecturing ppl if they don't share your priorities right away.

2. don't be rude to me because someone else flame baited you. I just
gave you my opinion on your suggestion.


-- 
---------------------------------------------
Victor Julien
http://www.inliniac.net/
PGP: http://www.inliniac.net/victorjulien.asc
---------------------------------------------


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
Vuurmuur-users mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/vuurmuur-users

Reply via email to