On Mon, Nov 11, 2013 at 12:27:35PM -0500, Russell Bryant wrote: > On 11/11/2013 12:09 PM, Anne Gentle wrote: > > What about something with attribution in the docs for the feature? Can > > we play around with that a while? Attribution is going to have to be > > incorporated better into the docs for the CC By licensing anyway. Any > > thoughts on docs as placement for "This feature brought to you by > > <insert rewarded upstreamer here>" We need to play with the words more. > > Sponsored by brings up ickies for me, sounds like it turns others off > > too. Let's be careful with wording and placement both. > > This sounds like it could get really messy. Once a feature goes in, it > becomes a collaboration between many people over time. It sounds like > it would get into the same situation as our copyright headers in source > files (wildly incomplete).
I think that's a very good point about the distinction between initial dev work vs ongoing maintenance of it. I don't think we want todo something which puts too much emphasis on the initial dev work, at the cost of the ongoing maint work that follows. Daniel -- |: http://berrange.com -o- http://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange/ :| |: http://libvirt.org -o- http://virt-manager.org :| |: http://autobuild.org -o- http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ :| |: http://entangle-photo.org -o- http://live.gnome.org/gtk-vnc :| _______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
