[sldev] Heads up - we're working on CMake

[Erik Anderson]

I hate to wade into this thread that has been obviously running for much
longer than it should have been (and doubt that this contribution will make
much of a difference), but I must admit I feel a bit badly for Bryan that
was so obviously jumped on by all these os coders out here.

The original email sounded very much like one or two developers are working
on their own on a CMake replacement for building the viewer and got a bit
excited and decided to tell the community what they were doing.  The only
possible response I can see them taking is to be less likely to discuss
their internal processes for fear of another response like this.

I doubt that LL is waiting for this thing to be "perfect", if they waited
for perfection before releasing something (1) nothing would ever be released
(SL perfect? ever?), and (2) there would be no need to release it to be
improved.  I know that personally before I would release something as
opensource I would make sure that I actually had something to provide (i.e.
it actually compiled and did a basic job of what it was trying to do)
otherwise there wouldn't be much purpose to throwing the code into the
void.  I don't get the impression that this CMake effort is up to this
point, although there is (or was) some excitement that this would occur
soon.

With so many requests for the CMake scripts, I get the impression that a lot
of people are dependent on these script in order to more easily build the
viewer.  Why is the entire opensource effort being tied to a developer
working on something that is not the main development focus right now?  If
there was a strong need for these files, I'm sure that there would be half a
dozen versions floating around that could be submitted or used in the
interim, such an effort could probably help as it would show potential
gotchas and issues that need to be dealt with before such a build process
could be adopted.  I mean heck we've even got the guy that wrote the program
in here.

There is a lot of criticism about how LL has been handling the opensource
movement.  A lot of it has value.  I particularly don't like what I'm
hearing about this auth method rewrite that seems to be going forward
despite os feedback (I'm hoping that when it comes out it's not as bad as it
sounds, but i'm not holding my breath).  I'm hoping that the response here
is more a reaction to any display of LL "holding back" code from the OS
community than of this particular situation.  The build script that is used
after all isn't going to change the actual content of the .exe or cause it
to behave any differently, it's a change in the process and procedures on
how the build is constructed.  I don't see any design or security issues
here at all.

I do see a lot of excitement here regarding the new build scripts, but a lot
of it reminds me of a pop star getting mobbed by his/her fans and getting
torn to shreds.  Which confuses the heck out of me.  What ever happened to
the "patch or leave" attitude I was hearing before?  It had plenty of
negative connotations and its own toxicity, but at the moment it seems more
healthy than this junk...

On 12/2/07, alissa_sabre at yahoo.co.jp <alissa_sabre at yahoo.co.jp> wrote:
>
> It is unfortunate to see that this discussion ends up with a flamewar
> between Lindens and open source developers.
>
> > Our current source release process is painful and
> > messy,
>
> I have no objection to this point.
>
> > and I don't want to derail getting a basic cmake build going by
> > simultaneously wrestling with that.
>
> I have no objection to this point either.
>
> What I was suggesting in my previous mail is simply disclose whatever
> you have.  I don't expect we get a working copy.  I guess you have
> started with the cmake for the LL internal source tree and it doesn't
> work with the open source version of the source tree.  That's totally
> fine for me, as I wrote:
>
> >  > Why you don't disclose the current work-in-progress?
>
> Honestly, I don't fully understand your points against this question.
> However, based on the messages sent to the sldev list regarding this
> issue, I have a feeling that if you distributed you current copies of
> cmakelists.txt as-is at the first place, the sldev list was filled
> with just another set of flamers.  I have a feeling that Lindens are
> not active making their intermediate work open because they fear open
> source developers complains.  (Of course I'm wrong on this point.)
>
> So, you may be right.  Please keep developing your cmake adaptation
> project by yourself, until it becomes perfect.
>
> It is sorrow to see we (Lindens and open soruce developers) can't
> collaborate even on a small project like this.  I'm not exactly sure
> what's wrong.
>
>     Alissa
> --------------------------------------
> New Design Yahoo! JAPAN  2008/01/01
> http://pr.mail.yahoo.co.jp/newdesign/
> _______________________________________________
> Click here to unsubscribe or manage your list subscription:
> /index.html
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/sldev/attachments/20071202/2d032980/attachment-0001.htm