Hello all, Michael McGrady wrote:
> This is a really good idea, Oleg. I am surprised, frankly, that we allow > people to use the @author tags without having signed the agreement > first. That would be a real problem. So that is one of the reasons for this discussion. If you feel that @authors without CLA should not be tagged, I happily agree that there is no problem with the rest. Whoever signed a CLA will have given adequate thought to legal implications. Thanks for your information about the roles of judge and jury. I'll keep that in mind. And also that there are laws for punishing people who file dumb lawsuits :-) Michael also wrote: > What are these "social issues"? I keep hearing the label but don't > know the reality. Are they important? The author tag is a recognition that the named author has contributed. It's something to remember and tell your friends about. Kind of an "I was here" graffiti. Doesn't it feel good to know that somewhere in the world, people you never even heard of are browsing the source code and suddenly read your name? I once filed a bug report and fix for the GNU linker. Years ago, but I still remember. (Gee, I forgot to check whether my name was mentioned in the change log ;-) I think it is important, since some people will be less inclined to participate in the community if they are afraid their share in the result is not attributed to them. Oleg wrote: > I think a simple extension to the existing changelog in a form of > 'proposed by', 'inspired by', 'contributed by', 'verified by' > 'helped by', 'tested by' clauses per major change/commit would be > sufficient for the time being. Until the dust settles at the > Jakarta PMC level What I like best about this proposal is the option to define new kinds of recognition on the fly. "inspired by" - that's cool :-) cheers, Roland
