Hi William,
On Jan 13, 2008 6:24 PM, William Stein <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On 1/13/08, Ondrej Certik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > On Jan 13, 2008 8:14 AM, William Stein <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > If you've contributed to Sage, please take a look at > > > http://sagemath.org/ack.html > > > > > > If (a) you aren't listed, or (b) you don't like how you're listed, or > > > (c) just want > > > the listing changed somehow, please send me an email at [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > so I can update the page. I haven't changed anything on that page for > > > quite > > > a while, but there have been many new contributors to Sage, so I bet it is > > > out of date, and I don't want anybody's valuable contributions to go > > > unrecognized. Thanks!! > > > > > > I was just going to ask about exactly the same thing. How do you > > measure a contributor? > > If *they* feel their contribution is significant enough that they > take the time to respond to this email, then they are almost certainly > a contributor (though I will of course decide based on what I get). > > > In sympy we list everyone who contributed at least a patch in the README > > > > http://hg.sympy.org/sympy/file/3d032940e734/README > > > > currently 18 people. But obviously, people can and do contribute by > > other means too, like writing docs, > > reporting bugs (very important contribution!), blogging, etc. > > Indeed. If anybody has contributed significantly to Sage this way, > I hope they will email me and be asked to be added to ack.html. > > > Also another problem is, for example let's say you would like to write > > a paper about Sage. So who should > > go among the authors of the paper? So we determine a set A of people > > who will be on that paper, but then all the other people who > > contribute later will not get any citation for their work, unless some > > new paper will be published. Etc. > > I'm not sure what you're asking, but if it is the general question of who > gets to be a co-author on a paper, I've dealt with that questions many > many times since most of my papers are co-authored: > > http://wstein.org/papers/ > > It is something that must always be dealt with on a case-by-case basis, > and the answer often depends very much on the people involved. > > > Another way of giving the credit is listing names of people in > > docstrings and files. (I don't like this, but we discussed this before > > already). > > True. I like this and we do this. But that's credit of a different form > than ack.html. > > > I like the http://sagemath.org/ack.html, also there could be links to > > the Sage wiki page about each contributor? I mean - > > there could be a wiki page where anyone can add himself, currently it's > > here: > > > > http://wiki.sagemath.org/ > > > > in the section PEOPLE. Actually I think the ack.html can be a wiki > > too, but maybe only the project leader could edit it. > > A wiki page that only I can edit is not really much different than > a static html page. We actually discussed exactly this point before > for a while, and people like keeping ack.html as a static html page > (not on the wiki). > > > So ack.html will > > say a little about each contributor, and then when clicking on his > > name, his wiki page will popup, where anyone can read in more details, > > what he works on in Sage, what he is interested in, etc. > > I could still make entries on ack.html have links to a wiki page or > something else. > > > We discussed this quite thouroghly in sympy too: > > > > http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=513 > > > > I think what works well is when the project leader uses his judgement > > and handles this as best as he can, i.e. listing all people who > > contributed a patch and listing all other people, who contributed > > significantly by other means. But nevertheless, maybe it's good to > > have some written set of rules, how to handle these things. > > I agree that using judgement works best. But sometimes I forgot to > update the page, and then having some people email me helps. Thanks for the reply. I see, the best way is to use judgement. Right, I agree with the way you do it. We'll try to do the same in sympy. Ondrej --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URLs: http://sage.scipy.org/sage/ and http://modular.math.washington.edu/sage/ -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
