> I'm not sure what all of the fuss is about: in papers is it common practise > to acknowledge funding sources. Indeed this is often required. If a > substantial piece of code is one of the funding outcomes shouldn't this be > acknowledged?
For me Sage is a collaborative software, not the administration's playground. > I have not been putting grant information into my code as I do agree that in > some ways adding grant information is like spam. Nonetheless, I think that we > probably all should start doing this if we want to maintain that writing code > should count as a research output, much like papers do. Only for papers it is only a couple of them, and for Sage it would mean adding them again and again and again. Let's not give them room for that. > I would have thought that the "correct" way to do this would be by adding a > brief sentence to the > AUTHORS: block > and the top of the file. This way when the code evolves later the correct > attribution remains in place. Let's put this in a graveyard file. We don't have to stand this absurdity of writing numbers where nobody reads them just to make them happy. Nathann -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sage-devel" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
