On 12/01/2016 02:13 PM, Andrey Utkin wrote: > On Thu, Dec 01, 2016 at 12:50:42PM -0800, Daniel Campbell wrote: >> I completely agree that we should credit (and thank) contributors. I'm >> not sure if I'm doing things correctly, but when I'm dealing with a bug >> and users contribute patches or edits to ebuilds, I try to credit them >> in my commit message, often asking them which nickname they'd prefer so >> I can give credit to the "right" name. Is this a practice you find adequate? > > As turned out, the problem was lack of communication rather than > misprocessing of original contribution. > > In Git, t's harder to erase the original authorship than to retain it, > so I don't see the need to discuss subtleties here. Common practice I > see in such projects as FFmpeg and Kernel is to pick the original patch > if possible, or, if credit must be given just for mere concept, the > contributor is mentioned in "Suggested-by:" line or just informally. > >> Thanks for bringing this to attention. It's somewhat related to another >> discussion we've been having about copyright, and it may be worth >> considering protocol for situations like the one you've outlined. > > Could you please give a link to archives of that discussion? > I'm a little busy this afternoon, but I have the subject titles for a few of the relevant posts:
[gentoo-dev] Contributed ebuilds and copyright questions (Oct 24th) [gentoo-dev] GLEP RFC: Third-party contributions (Oct 27th) I remember one more, I believe started by rich0? But it's not in my mail client anymore as I routinely purge older discussions. I can look for it tonight if you'd like. -- Daniel Campbell - Gentoo Developer OpenPGP Key: 0x1EA055D6 @ hkp://keys.gnupg.net fpr: AE03 9064 AE00 053C 270C 1DE4 6F7A 9091 1EA0 55D6
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
