| 1 |
On Wed, Dec 16, 2015 at 8:54 AM, Alexander Berntsen <bernalex@g.o> wrote: |
| 2 |
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- |
| 3 |
> Hash: SHA512 |
| 4 |
> |
| 5 |
> On 16/12/15 13:39, Rich Freeman wrote: |
| 6 |
>> I don't see how this is dishonest. |
| 7 |
> You answered this yourself, |
| 8 |
> |
| 9 |
>> They'll just be credited side-by-side with everybody else in once |
| 10 |
>> place. |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
How is this dishonest? I see how it is less granular in one |
| 13 |
particular format. All the current OpenRC authors will be credited. |
| 14 |
The granular details of their contributions will still be present in |
| 15 |
git, even if it is hard to access. |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
We just won't credit them in the individual file they contributed to. |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
Is there some practical situation where you see this as being |
| 20 |
disadvantageous to a contributor? If I'm an employer looking to hire |
| 21 |
somebody, knowing they contributed to openrc is probably as useful to |
| 22 |
knowing they contributed to /lib64/rc/bin/service_starting. If I |
| 23 |
REALLY care about the specific nature of their contributions, I'm |
| 24 |
going to care what their actual commits were, and for that matter if |
| 25 |
they were of a high quality. It seems like the current system is an |
| 26 |
intermediate level of detail that doesn't seem useful, just cumbersome |
| 27 |
(in the opinion of the maintainers - it isn't like I have to maintain |
| 28 |
this stuff). |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
The other side of this is that you could argue that the openrc |
| 31 |
maintainers might be able to just save themselves some headaches and |
| 32 |
not host this stuff on Gentoo infra, and then they can just do |
| 33 |
whatever they want. It isn't like we tell the sysvinit maintainers |
| 34 |
how to manage their code, and it isn't like Gentoo is the only distro |
| 35 |
that uses openrc. |
| 36 |
|
| 37 |
|
| 38 |
-- |
| 39 |
Rich |
Archives