I agree with Nathan and Nyall. The commit history isn't a very
"official" thing, so there is some room for attribution and other
additional information.
Personally I prefer a meaningful commit message with some "spam" in it
over a commit message that contains (almost) no useful information like
"Fix #1234", "Fix #4567 [Meaningless title of an issue report]"
"Followup 65443" (That one is not so bad, but could be improved with
some prose). I often find myself looking at the commit history to find
information about why something was done.
IF something needs to be fixed in the commit log, then we should rather
focus on this than on a bit of pride, fun and attribution.
I also think that a list of funders/sponsors for a particular version
would be nice. This could be directly below the changelog or linked
there (I am rather thinking of a list than each individual change).
Regards,
Matthias
On 10/10/2014 10:01 AM, Nathan Woodrow wrote:
I'm with Nyall. I see no direct reason this is a bad idea. If I do
something in my free time I don't care about getting recognition for
it because my direct work on the project is enough and if someone
wants to see what I do they can check my commit history or blog,
however if I commit something, say a feature that took be a while to
make, on work time under my employers name for them I think it's worth
noting that they sponsored that work. Their contribution can be
traced to that single commit and pulled from the log.
The place it gets tricky is if you are running your own business
committing all the time for work reasons.
On the same note I do think it's worth having a page for each release
with a list of users who were active and sponsors that did the work.
This would mean everyone gets highlighted for their work. It doesn't
need to be name + feature type of list, just a list of names is enough..
- Nathan
On Fri, Oct 10, 2014 at 5:50 PM, Nyall Dawson <nyall.daw...@gmail.com
<mailto:nyall.daw...@gmail.com>> wrote:
On 10 October 2014 18:11, Alessandro Pasotti <apaso...@gmail.com
<mailto:apaso...@gmail.com>> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I noticed that somebody started to add commercials to commit logs:
>
> Sponsored by ....
>
> Funded by ...
>
> etc. etc.
>
> We should take this seriously, mostly ever developer works for a
> company or run its own business.
>
> Imagine if everybody starts adding those (not really useful)
sentences
> to every commit.
>
Is this really an issue? It seems rather trivial. I personally am
strongly in favour of these attributions in the commit log. Reasons
are:
- It gives credit to sponsors. That's important! Look at how many cool
features were added in 2.6 thanks to sponsorship...
- It gives credit to developers who donate their free/company time.
That's also important. QGIS wouldn't exist if it wasn't for these
developers donating their time
- The commit log is basically for developers or power
users/contributors only. It's a fairly harmless place to advertise
these sponsorship messages. For a while there was a few "sponsored by"
messages in code comments - that's a much worse/more intrusive place
for these messages.
- It lets us blow off steam when release pressures ramp up :P see
68c49fe09, 34f00d106 and 2427546d8
So, +1 for allowing these messages.
Nyall
_______________________________________________
Qgis-developer mailing list
Qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org <mailto:Qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org>
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
_______________________________________________
Qgis-developer mailing list
Qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
_______________________________________________
Qgis-developer mailing list
Qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
