> On Thursday, May 5, 2016 12:14 AM, Chris McCormick <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Jonathan, > [...] > This may be relevant to your interests: > https://github.com/chr15m/gitnonymous > Cheers, > Chris. I thought about this a bit, and I've come to the conclusion that-- currently-- there is never a situation where I'd accept code submitted anonymously. But even more important, there is never a situation where I'd personally vouch for code publicly attributed to some unknown person or entity's pseudonym. That's the only sane way forward IMO-- if you ask me who "user@user-ThinkPad-X60.(none)", the answer is, "that's garbage I mistakenly leaked from my laptop." And if that weren't the answer, the only other possible answers are, "that looks like garbage from [insert a person's real name here]," or "I don't know who submitted that". In fact it's way safer from the perspective of the pseudon or anon to feed an idea for a bugfix or feature out-of-band to an extant developer. Then it's in the "handwriting" of the public developer. Moreover, even if you ratchet up the surveillance (say, having developers record themselves coding up, testing, and submitting patches, which isn't a bad idea btw) it doesn't reveal anything more about the identity of the anon. It's also important from the public developer's perspective, as they have to explicitly take responsibility for the bugfix/feature, and the risks associated with that. -Jonathan
_______________________________________________ Pd-dev mailing list [email protected] https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-dev
