On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 8:43 AM, Andy Wingo <[email protected]> wrote: > On Tue 01 Dec 2015 08:12, Florian Paul Schmidt <[email protected]> writes: > >> ...and encourage its use. The intended semantics is to list people >> that have contributed to the packaging effort. The motivation behind >> this proposal is that in many free software projects attribution can >> be a major source of motivation to get people involved. Having the >> packagers be first class citizens in the package definitions (as >> opposed to the information being only implicitly available through >> e.g. "git blame") would allow things like "guix package" or the >> package list on the website to display the contributor's names. > > Since you ask for opinions, -1 from me :) > > Currently Guix packages are more-or-less collectively owned. > Introducing this field implies to me an introduction of ownership of > packages. Ownership has a number of negative effects: it can inhibit > casual fixes and it can introduce unnecessary conflicts. > > The kind of ego-based positive feedback that having a maintainer field > would introduce is negative IMO. It is good if people feel attached to > Guix-the-project and GuixSD-the-software-distribution, and to a degree > they get that by copyright, git blame, and NEWS. Feeling attached to a > particular package is not as useful for the project or the distribution.
+1 - Dave
