I am inclined to agree with Subbu, but of course there are legal implications. Zhou said it would be fine to move all these tags to a centralised CREDITS file and point to that file, and that doing so wouldn't breach the licence. He is a lawyer and is therefore qualified to make such determinations.
Whether moving CREDITS to a centralised file actually solves the problem, rather than just shifting it around, is debatable. Dan On 13 June 2017 at 06:11, Subramanya Sastry <[email protected]> wrote: > I noticed that core files have @author annotations. > > My take on this is as follows: Any active codebase (such as mediawiki) > sees constant change and code is refactored, rewritten, renamed, files > moved around, split up, etc. that the only meaningful interperation of > "@author" would be someone who first created that file / function, no > matter how small that piece of code was. At that level, it is not that > meaningful, especially in the face of refactoring and restructuring. git > log --follow might provide a better picture for an individual file. I think > all @author annotations should be removed. When editing a piece of code, I > imagine some developers might find it a little annoying ... and confusing > especially during refactoring ... whether to retain it or not. > > I find these annotations misleading and wonder why they exist and what > purpose they serve. Would appreciate a discussion on this. Alternatively, I > would appreciate if someone can point me to a wiki page / phab task / essay > that explains the rationale for why these annotations should exist and be > preserved. > > Thanks, > > Subbu. > > > _______________________________________________ > Wikitech-l mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l -- Dan Garry Lead Product Manager, Discovery Wikimedia Foundation _______________________________________________ Wikitech-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
