On Thu, Dec 2, 2010 at 2:51 AM, Gavin Simpson <gavin.simpson@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]]

