On Sat, 2004-01-03 at 13:48, Stephane Nicoll wrote: > I agree with you. > However, what about cvs history?
Why should I have to use CVS history to glean one of the most useful pieces of information to a source file. Not only is it important information insofar as being able to ask questions but I always look at @author tags as I can get a pretty good understanding of what I'm in for by looking at the authors. I want to see that information as I often make decisions whether to even try something based on who wrote it. I'm not taking my @author tags out, I really don't care what anyone else does. You can't force someone to put @author tags in the sources. I just find it pointless to remove them. If someone really wants to be anonymous and "do it all for the community" then they not just remove their names from the sources but from everything if that's what they believe. For myself, among everythign else I certainly do it for the recognition and I want my name in there. Even on lots of the shit code I've written I still want my name in there. But whatever, I think removing @author tags is a ridiculous and silly idea. Whatever floats your boat. > -- > jvz. > > Jason van Zyl > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://tambora.zenplex.org > > In short, man creates for himself a new religion of a rational > and technical order to justify his work and to be justified in it. > > -- Jacques Ellul, The Technological Society --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
