Hi, On 2023-02-09 10:28:36 +0100, Dag Lem wrote: > I'll ask again, would the proposed credits be acceptable? In this case, > the code already existed elsewhere (as in your example for double > metaphone) as a separate extension. The copyright owner is OK with > copyright assignment, however I find it quite unreasonable that proper > credits should not be given.
You don't need to assign copyright, it needs however be licensed under the terms of the PostgreSQL License. > Neither commit messages nor release notes > follow the contributed module, which is in its entirety contributed by > an external entity. The problem with adding credits to source files is that it's hard to maintain them reasonably over time. At what point has a C file been extended sufficiently to warrant an additional author? > I'll also point out that in addition to credits in code all over the > place, PostgreSQL has much more prominent credits in the documentation: > > grep -ER "Author" doc/ | grep -v PostgreSQL FWIW, I'd rather remove them. In several of those the credited author has, by now, only done a small fraction of the overall work. They don't make much sense to me - you don't get a permanent mention in other parts of the documentation either. Many of the binaries outside of contrib/ involved a lot more work by one individual than cases in contrib/. Lots of backend code has a *lot* of work done by one individual, yet we don't add authorship notes in relevant sections of the documentation. Greetings, Andres Freund
