On Mon, 4 Nov 2013 20:15:01 +0100, Jochen Wiedmann wrote:
On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 2:26 PM, Gilles
<gil...@harfang.homelinux.org>wrote:
Hello.
Are there criteria about filling the "due-to" attribute of an issue
record in the "changes.xml" file?
Be generous with using it: I've seen examples of people being quite
stimulated for more work by them included in that list.
I don't have a problem with mentioning more people there. I have a
problem
with having no policy as to how to associate the cited work with the
people
who did it.
Beyond fairness, being specific about attribution also avoids the risk
of
bad feelings wondering why one name is mentioned while another isn't
(as is
the case _now_).
As far as I can deduce from past releases and the SVN log, there was an
assumed policy of mentioning people who produced patches.
IMO, this issue is indeed too important (for the reason you give above)
to
let each committer decide independently what is published in the
release
notes. If we agree on this, then I don't understand why people would
prefer
to sweep this under the rug (delivering warm-feeling generalities),
rather
than propose a solution (concrete policy).
Regards,
Gilles
Jochen
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
