On 6/30/06, Krzysztof Foltman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
James Hawkins wrote:
> I've just looked at this patch and the previous patch Thomas sent in,
> and saying that this is roughly based on his patch is putting it
> lightly.
> missing feature, but either way, he deserves credit for the code he
> wrote, and not just saying that your code was based off of his.
He obviously does. The previous version of the patch (which I re-sent)
HAS his name as the sole author of the changes.
I'm not accusing you of intentionally ripping Thomas off, only that
more credit is due than was given, and I gave possible solutions to
this problem. The previous version you sent in did have his name,
which is perfectly legit, but this version doesn't. You can either
add his name as well as yours to the changelog, or ask him to resend
the tests separately.
--
James Hawkins
