Sam Ruby wrote:
Yes, but here we are not talking only about ownership but also respect and visibility (which is the resources apache uses to pay people back).Berin Loritsch wrote:I am using this case as an example. Someone removed author tags--explicitly Peter D.'s. Peter D. is currently unable to ensure that his author tags remain which he seems pretty stuck on. Removing an author tag without the consent of the author is not cool.
At the present time Peter has exactly the same options available to him as any other Avalon contributor (as distinct from an Avalon committer).
If this is the perception of an author's role, it provides excellent reasons
for removing the author tag, in my view.The important thing is that it is done *with* the author's consent.
The code is owned by the community. If the author did not wish the code to be owned by the community, then the author should not have donated it.
I have contributed patches to various Avalon source files (mostly build.xml related, or a rare fix to a build failure). Those were donations. Once donated, the onus of ongoing maintenance is transferred to the recipient.
The solution to this problem is behaving friendly.
Here, any problem is seen as a potential personal attack.
On cocoon-dev, for example, any problem is seen as a simple mistake that should be no big deal since everybody makes mistakes.
And @author attributions have nothing to do with this since cocoon keeps them forever and we are proud of being able to pay back our contributors by listing their name along with their contributions.
--
Stefano Mazzocchi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--------------------------------------------------------------------
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
