:Re: @author tags
At the risk of adding fuel to an unproductive discussion, I thought I'd
throw in my comments:
[...snip...]
Having noted some of the social issues, I do have to say that this
mailing list has been very friendly and welcoming, and my compliments to
everyone for keeping
Hello Michael,
I hope this mail is still readable once it is converted
to text-only format...
Fuel to this fire, I think, is fine. Why not talk it out?
Primarily because this mailing list is not for legal discussion,
and we'll never ever talk it out. You are a lawyer, most of us
are not.
Roland Weber wrote:
Hello Eric,
I was thinking about some kind of metrics, too.
Not as advanced as yours, of course :-) But then
I felt that a ranking is not the best approach. It
may lure people to use tricks just to improve
their ranking.
Too true. My perspective on this matter is colored by
the dust settles at
the Jakarta PMC level
Thoughts?
Oleg
-Original Message-
From: Eric Johnson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, March 16, 2004 14:29
To: Commons HttpClient Project
Subject: Re: @author tags
Roland Weber wrote:
Hello Eric,
I was thinking about some kind
To: Commons HttpClient Project
Subject: Re: @author tags
Fuel to this fire, I think, is fine. Why not talk it out? Why not share
perspectives and information? I have some remarks about what you have
said, that I hope are helpful, see infra:
CAN ANYONE ACTUALLY IDENTIFY A SINGLE LEGAL ISSUE
technical solution.
cheers,
Roland
Eric Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
15.03.2004 22:52
Please respond to Commons HttpClient Project
To: Commons HttpClient Project
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
cc:
Subject:Re: @author tags
At the risk of adding fuel to an unproductive
Thanks, Roland! You are a balanced mind. Refreshing! I read the IBM and
SCO complaint. There is nothing extra-ordinary about that. If someone
were taking proprietary code and introducing it into open source, that
would be something that should be stopped. The @author tags are not
related
Hello, Roland, you wrote:
Your views are founded in your knowledge of the law of
the country you work in, while ours are based on news reports
about seemingly nonsensical lawsuits filed in the US.
This is a media blitz that sells crap to the hoi polloi. The truth is
that there are few cases
be sufficient for the
time being. Until the dust settles at the Jakarta PMC level
Thoughts?
Oleg
-Original Message-
From: Eric Johnson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, March 16, 2004 14:29
To: Commons HttpClient Project
Subject: Re: @author tags
Roland Weber wrote:
Hello Eric,
I
they are
Mike, probably we should run a vote on this matter and get it over with.
What do you think?
Oleg
-Original Message-
From: Michael McGrady [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, March 15, 2004 23:29
To: Commons HttpClient Project
Subject: Re: @author tags
Fuel to this fire, I think
Hello all,
Michael McGrady wrote:
This is a really good idea, Oleg. I am surprised, frankly, that we
allow
people to use the @author tags without having signed the agreement
first. That would be a real problem.
So that is one of the reasons for this discussion.
If you feel that @authors
At the risk of adding fuel to an unproductive discussion, I thought I'd
throw in my comments:
Legal:
* IANAL, however, it strikes me that there is at least some small
legal exposure in the @author tags. As a contributor of sorts,
but not an official committer, there are certain
Fuel to this fire, I think, is fine. Why not talk it out? Why not share
perspectives and information? I have some remarks about what you have
said, that I hope are helpful, see infra:
CAN ANYONE ACTUALLY IDENTIFY A SINGLE LEGAL ISSUE WITH USING AUTHOR
TAGS? Even though I am a lawyer, and a
Hi folks,
let me add a few lines to the discussion...
Dan Christopherson wrote:
I think that owner is intended in the sense of the primary person
responsible for maintaining, not in the sense of the legel owner.
Yes, that was - and is - exactly my understanding of the
term code owner.
a silly thing is a silly thing. If removing author tags may
reduce the risk of being sued, then rip them out.
One reason cited for removing the @author tags is for legal protection --
and it's a good reason. But I don't see how removing @author tags can offer
any legal protection, unless you
:
Subject:Re: @author tags
a silly thing is a silly thing. If removing author tags may
reduce the risk of being sued, then rip them out.
One reason cited for removing the @author tags is for legal protection --
and it's a good reason. But I don't see how removing @author tags can
offer
THE PRACTICAL ASPECT OF THIS DISCUSSION IS AT BEST DUBIOUS
The use of @author tags has a lot more than ownership or braggadocio to
recommend itself to us. When we see certain authors, then we know that we
don't have to double check the code too much. We might even stop for that
reason
Roland Weber and, then, Chris Lamprecht wrote:
a silly thing is a silly thing. If removing author tags may
reduce the risk of being sued, then rip them out.
One reason cited for removing the @author tags is for legal protection --
and it's a good reason. But I don't see how removing @author
Hi all,
I understand that people have a lot to say on this topic, however this is
most definitely not the list to say it on. No one on this list has the
legal authority to represent or make decisions on behalf of the ASF and this
is an ASF decision. The recommendation that author tags not be
Roland Weber wrote:
I don't see that either. But if some of the top Apache guys
feel, believe or know otherwise, that's good enough for me.
Know what? This has become a recreation of illusions and delusions. This
is like Franz Kafka's book The Trial. There are vague and unsubstantiated
:
Subject:Re: @author tags
THE PRACTICAL ASPECT OF THIS DISCUSSION IS AT BEST DUBIOUS
The use of @author tags has a lot more than ownership or braggadocio to
recommend itself to us. When we see certain authors, then we know that we
don't have to double check the code too much
:38
To: Commons HttpClient Project
Subject: Re: @author tags
Roland Weber wrote:
I don't see that either. But if some of the top Apache guys
feel, believe or know otherwise, that's good enough for me.
Know what? This has become a recreation of illusions and delusions. This
is like Franz Kafka's
Actually Roland shines when it comes to giving feedback to proposed
changes, patches, answering questions, and helping people on the
mailing. He is precisely the reason I (as a HttpClient project
committer) would like to have a better attribution structure that goes
beyond @author tag. The
You are not likely to get a replacement mechanism from the Board. You
*might* from the PMC, but that will be driven from the project level up,
as the PMC is composed of a sampling of committers.
If HttpClient comes up with an alternative, I could present it to the
PMC and it could become the
Adrian,
As far as I can see, the discussion is happening on many project lists,
and on the pmc list. You would think [EMAIL PROTECTED] would be a better
forum, but its quiet there.
Because this is a board recomendation individual projects have to make
their own dicisions on wether to
Roland Weber wrote:
The ASF has recently recommended that we discontinue use of @author
tags.
For me, that is reason enough to remove the author tags
in the absence of better reasons to keep them. I trust the
ASF implicitly to have discussed this matter thoroughly.
If I didn't trust them, I'd
Subject: Re: @author tags
Roland Weber wrote:
I don't see that either. But if some of the top Apache guys
feel, believe or know otherwise, that's good enough for me.
Know what? This has become a recreation of illusions and delusions. This
is like Franz Kafka's book The Trial. There are vague
PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, March 12, 2004 16:15
To: Commons HttpClient Project
Subject: RE: @author tags
We all love Roland. No issue there. However, I really cannot see how the
@author tag hides any contributions. Maybe on that issue I am lost? That
is another matter altogether. I was discussing
Does anyone have the recommendation or the reasoning? There seems to be
a dirth of information on what they were thinking about. Just to assume
that representatives of the various projects know more than the members of
the projects about this issue is not a good way to go, in my opinion.
Mike posted the board reccomendation at the begining of this thread.
Much of the heat on the PMC list is a lack of consultation and exposure
of this issue.
Sombody must know what they were thinking, but its not me.
-jsd
Michael McGrady wrote:
Does anyone have the recommendation or the
I'm currently reading _The Pragmatic Programmer_, and I just came across the
following in a section entitled Comments in Code on page 250:
One of the most important pieces of information that should appear in the
source file is the author's name -- not necessarily who edited the file
last, but
,
Roland
Chris Lamprecht [EMAIL PROTECTED]
11.03.2004 09:54
Please respond to Commons HttpClient Project
To: Commons HttpClient Project
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
cc:
Subject:Re: @author tags
I'm currently reading _The Pragmatic Programmer_, and I just came across
of being the owner of the code.
cheers,
Roland
Chris Lamprecht [EMAIL PROTECTED]
11.03.2004 09:54
Please respond to Commons HttpClient Project
To: Commons HttpClient Project
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
cc:
Subject:Re: @author tags
I'm currently reading _The Pragmatic
PROTECTED]
11.03.2004 09:54
Please respond to Commons HttpClient Project
To: Commons HttpClient Project
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
cc:Subject:Re: @author tags
I'm currently reading _The Pragmatic Programmer_, and I just came
across the
following in a section entitled Comments
Dan Christopherson wrote:
I think that owner is intended in the sense of the primary person
responsible for maintaining, not in the sense of the legel owner.
Honestly, there is no such thing in this project. The responsible
persons are the (few) active committers. Those change (slowly) over
]
cc:
Subject:Re: @author tags
I'm currently reading _The Pragmatic Programmer_, and I just came across
the
following in a section entitled Comments in Code on page 250:
One of the most important pieces of information that should appear in the
source file is the author's name
To: Commons HttpClient Project
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
cc:Subject:Re: @author tags
I'm currently reading _The Pragmatic Programmer_, and I just came across the
following in a section entitled Comments in Code on page 250:
One of the most important pieces of information
:Subject:Re: @author tags
I'm currently reading _The Pragmatic Programmer_, and I just came across the
following in a section entitled Comments in Code on page 250:
One of the most important pieces of information that should appear in the
source file is the author's name -- not necessarily
Fair point. ASF is the legal owner, not the maintainer. But @author
tags do not help in identifying the maintainer at all for many reasons.
A maintainer really implies one place or person for contact. A running
list of @author tags, some current some ancient, do not satisfy this.
The only
I'm not on the board, but I'm aware of two issues:
1) The ASF board has concerns over the legal ramifications of @author
tags in code. IE it might be possible for someone to sue someone listed
as an @author.
2) The tags have caused social issues in some projects (conflicts
between people) which
On the first issue, I am a lawyer and I can assure you that this worry is,
frankly, silly. Unless you are going to hide who did coding, then this is
also completely ineffective to meet that worry, which, as I said, is silly
anyway.
The second issue cannot be commented on because what the
Michael Becke wrote:
The ASF has recently recommended that we discontinue use of @author
tags. When first starting out I always enjoyed seeing my name in
lights, though I do agree with the ASF's opinion on this matter. If
we come to a consensus to remove @authors I suggest that we remove
I agree that removing author tags eliminates one of the big attractions
for casual contributors. To compensate we should definitely be more
proactive about giving people credit in other ways. Perhaps we can
come up with a more automated way of showing contributions. Any ideas?
Perhaps we
credit to the existing
contributors in some form would be a little harsh.
Oleg
-Original Message-
From: Michael Becke [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, March 10, 2004 14:26
To: Commons HttpClient Project
Subject: Re: @author tags
I agree that removing author tags eliminates one
Kalnichevski, Oleg wrote:
I could also imagine some sort of 'thank you' page listing individuals with their respective contributions.
The real question is what is to be done with all the contributions made up to now.
Yes, let's just put together that 'thank you' page (think of it like the
) jakarta level repository?
What if we kept the tags for the 3.0 release, as long as we stay in the Jakarta
Commons?
Oleg
-Original Message-
From: Ortwin Glück [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, March 10, 2004 15:43
To: Commons HttpClient Project
Subject: Re: @author tags
I personally think that this is a much more important mistake than people
may realize. I would counsel you to go slowly on this one. This one may
bite you on the butt.
At 11:02 PM 3/9/2004, you wrote:
I personally regret this decision. I feel the author tag may be pretty
much the only
My understanding of human psychology leads me to think that whomever came
up with this idea has underestimated the importance of the @author tags to
the open source community.
At 09:49 AM 3/10/2004, you wrote:
Michael, are you saying that removing @author tags would be a mistake?
What in
As far as timing goes, we can be pretty flexible I think. My preference
would be to stop adding author tags now and begin putting people on a
thank you list. We can then migrate existing @authors when the time
seems right, (i.e. whenever someone gets stuck doing it).
Sounds like a
We had this same conversation on commons-dev. This does appear to be a
contentious issue. Personally I don't really mind if my name appears
in a file or not. I think it is all about the community.
There is a difference between the developer and the contributor though.
I think it is the
I don't think that the final word has been said on the use of @author
tags by the PMC. At the moment, discouraged seems to be more of a
suggestion than a requirement. It is unclear on what benefit removing
the tags will have, from a legal perspective. It is also my feeling
that if we are to
To make it easier for us, we could even have people compose and maintain
their own list of contributions.
Ortwin Glück wrote:
Yes, let's just put together that 'thank you' page (think of it like the
credits of movie). The question is if we just want to list the names or
if we actually want to
I personally regret this decision. I feel the author tag may be pretty
much the only motivating factor for casual contributions. But I will not
object
Oleg
On Wed, 2004-03-10 at 04:32, Michael Becke wrote:
The ASF has recently recommended that we discontinue use of @author
tags. When first
On 10/3/04 5:02 PM, Oleg Kalnichevski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I personally regret this decision. I feel the author tag may be pretty
much the only motivating factor for casual contributions. But I will not
object
I'm a big fan of author tags (I like to know who to blame mostly :). I
won't
54 matches
Mail list logo
