<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type">
<title></title>
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
Alexander Neundorf wrote:<br>
<blockquote cite="mid20060909071634.117290@gmx.net" type="cite">
<pre wrap="">
Von: "Brandon J. Van Every" <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:bvanevery@gmail.com"><bvanevery@gmail.com></a>
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">CMake online documentation in general is poor. The
mailing list is great, you can get all your questions rapidly answered
there, but documentation is definitely a serious shortcoming.
[...] Pretty much the same reason why the CMake online docs don't
improve; everyone's too busy with something more important.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><!---->
I really don't understand why you claim so often that the online docs are so poor. Surely they can be improved. They were good enough for me.</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
I don't think you're in an objective position to evaluate the quality
of the docs. For instance, take this comment from the Chicken mailing
list. I need to follow up with Thomas about this. Docs aside, the
claim that Chicken is not building disturbs me greatly. I hope he's
really just having VTK problems.<br>
<br>
<br>
Thomas Chust wrote:<br>
<blockquote cite="midPine.OSX.4.64.0609091432150.217@nfd88.rhi.hi.is"
type="cite"> <br>
Not only is the CMake documentation scarce, it also frequently seems to
be wrong and in the past four weeks I have not managed, even after
modifications in the CMakeLists.txt files, to get two large CMake
powered projects, namely CHICKEN and VTK, to build using CMake 2.4.3 on
either <br>
<br>
- MacOS X using gcc-3.3 <br>
- MacOS X using gcc-4.0 <br>
- Windows XP Professional using MinGW gcc-3.2 and MSYS <br>
- Windows XP Professional using MinGW gcc-3.2 without MSYS <br>
- Windows XP Professional using Open Watcom 1.5 <br>
</blockquote>
<br>
<br>
Cheers,<br>
Brandon Van Every<br>
<br>
</body>
</html>