On 2018/05/17 19:18, Maxim Sobolev wrote:
> John, no, not really, sorry. Work is done, credit is given. The form and
> amount of this credit is between whoever does the work and whoever is
> being credited. I don't see why is there any third-party to be involved
> in governing whether or not this credit is "appropriate", "sufficient"
> or "all encompassing" for the work in question. This is just a credit,
> it does not affect the quality of work, nor the license (which is
> 2-clause BSD) nor the copyright holder. Three things that really matter
> long-time. So "Sponsored by" it's just the message on the t-shirt,
> having only meaning to whoever produces the piece and whoever wears it,
> but nothing in particular to the outside world. IMHO.

I fear that you and I are still not on the same page. The difference
between a t-shirt and a commit message is that two or three or four
people can all do work on the same commit, but only one person can wear
a t-shirt.

Taking the analogy further, if you hang a t-shirt with your employer's
logo on a piece of work that you and I collaborated to produce, don't
you think my employer might feel slighted? What if I had done 80% of the

> On Thu, May 17, 2018 at 3:43 PM, John W. O'Brien <j...@saltant.com
> <mailto:j...@saltant.com>> wrote:
>     On 2018/05/14 20:14, Maxim Sobolev wrote:
>     > What's wrong with a current practice. Why is it of any concern to you,
>     > John? Just curious that is not very clear from your message. It is like
>     > someone trying to moderate what people in general or some group in
>     > particular (e.g. freebsd committers) are allowed to put on their
>     > t-shirts just because you find it offensive or inappropriate.
>     I don't find crediting sponsors offensive nor inappropriate. Quite the
>     contrary. What I find problematic is when multiple people do work, not
>     all with sponsorship or the same sponsorship, and only one person's
>     sponsor is mentioned in a way that seems to imply that all the work was
>     sponsored.
>     What I'm proposing is not to end or ban the practice, but to improve and
>     refine it so that sponsors are credited for what they sponsor and not
>     for what they don't sponsor.
>     Is that clearer?
>     > On Mon, May 14, 2018, 4:40 PM John W. O'Brien <j...@saltant.com 
> <mailto:j...@saltant.com>
>     > <mailto:j...@saltant.com <mailto:j...@saltant.com>>> wrote:
>     >
>     >     Hello FreeBSD Ports,
>     >
>     >     The Committer's Guide section on Commit Log Messages [0],
>     doesn't cover
>     >     the use of the "Sponsored by" key word. As a non-committer
>     contributor,
>     >     it only recently occurred to me to wonder what work that credit is
>     >     intended to represent, and whether some light definition would be
>     >     helpful to reduce ambiguity.
>     >
>     >     When a committer credits a sponsor of theirs, from which the
>     contributor
>     >     received no sponsorship, the portrayal feels a little awkward.
>     Does this
>     >     strike the list as a problem, and if so, how ought it be solved?
>     >
>     >     To make this concrete, allow me to illustrate the situation.
>     >
>     >     Alice, working on her own time, prepares and contributes a
>     patch. Bob,
>     >     who works for Acme Corp, reviews and commits the patch on
>     company time.
>     >     The commit message includes "Sponsored by: Acme Corp". Alice
>     eagerly
>     >     awaits her check from Acme Corp. Should the commit message
>     have read
>     >     "Sponsored by: Acme Corp (Bob)"?
>     >
>     >     This could be extensible to multiple sponsorships. If,
>     instead, Alice
>     >     prepares the patch having received a grant to do so from Best
>     Sys Dev,
>     >     the commit message could state "Sponsored by: Acme Corp (Bob),
>     Best Sys
>     >     Dev (Alice)".
>     >
>     >     [0]
>     >   
> https://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/articles/committers-guide/article.html#commit-log-message
> <https://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/articles/committers-guide/article.html#commit-log-message>
>     >
>     >     PS: I realize that this issue transcends ports, but it's not
>     clear where
>     >     I should send this instead, and this list seems like it would
>     have a
>     >     reasonably high concentration of people with a stake in the
>     discussion.

John W. O'Brien
OpenPGP keys:

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Reply via email to