You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@stdcxx.apache.org by Martin Sebor <se...@roguewave.com> on 2007/10/02 22:45:46 UTC
[RFC] stdcxx acknowledgments (was: Re: [jira] Updated: (STDCXX-505)
Update the Acknowledgments page)
In the patch attached to the issue Marc proposes to replace
the names of the original Rogue Wave "contributors" to the
project (which included support engineers as well management)
with those of stdcxx committers (including Emeriti). I'd like
to request people's opinion on this change. I personally am
not entirely comfortable dropping all the contributors that
predate stdcxx, although perhaps it may not be inappropriate
(sorry for the double negative) to pare it down to people who
contributed significant code and/or documentation changes).
What do others think?
Martin
Marc Betz (JIRA) wrote:
> [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/STDCXX-505?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ]
>
> Marc Betz updated STDCXX-505:
> -----------------------------
>
> Attachment: (was: acknow.html)
>
>> Update the Acknowledgments page
>> -------------------------------
>>
>> Key: STDCXX-505
>> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/STDCXX-505
>> Project: C++ Standard Library
>> Issue Type: Sub-task
>> Components: Documentation
>> Affects Versions: 4.1.2, 4.1.3, 4.1.4
>> Reporter: Marc Betz
>> Assignee: Marc Betz
>> Fix For: 4.2
>>
>>
>
>
Re: [RFC] stdcxx acknowledgments
Posted by Martin Sebor <se...@roguewave.com>.
Andrew Black wrote:
> Greetings all.
>
> One thought that I have looking over the proposed patch is that it
> doesn't include the names of people who have contribute code to the
> release, but who aren't comitters. Scott Zhong and Travis Vitek both
> have changes attributed to them, but neither name appears in the list.
> I suspect there are others, but it would require a search through the
> change logs to locate the changes in question.
True. I think the question we would need to ask ourselves is: where
do we draw the line? More specifically, what are the minimum criteria
for a person to meet to be acknowledged.
If we were to decide to acknowledge everyone who ever contributed any
code (which, presumably, ended up getting committed), we could simply
search our ChangeLogs for the unique names of patch authors.
I still think the safest way to proceed is to rename the page to
history.html and keep the names that are already on it (or some
subset thereof, whatever we decide) under the section describing
the Rogue Wave ancestry of stdcxx.
Martin
>
> --Andrew Black
>
> Martin Sebor wrote:
>> In the patch attached to the issue Marc proposes to replace
>> the names of the original Rogue Wave "contributors" to the
>> project (which included support engineers as well management)
>> with those of stdcxx committers (including Emeriti). I'd like
>> to request people's opinion on this change. I personally am
>> not entirely comfortable dropping all the contributors that
>> predate stdcxx, although perhaps it may not be inappropriate
>> (sorry for the double negative) to pare it down to people who
>> contributed significant code and/or documentation changes).
>>
>> What do others think?
>>
>> Martin
>>
>> Marc Betz (JIRA) wrote:
>>> [
>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/STDCXX-505?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
>>> ]
>>>
>>> Marc Betz updated STDCXX-505:
>>> -----------------------------
>>>
>>> Attachment: (was: acknow.html)
>>>
>>>> Update the Acknowledgments page
>>>> -------------------------------
>>>>
>>>> Key: STDCXX-505
>>>> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/STDCXX-505
>>>> Project: C++ Standard Library
>>>> Issue Type: Sub-task
>>>> Components: Documentation
>>>> Affects Versions: 4.1.2, 4.1.3, 4.1.4
>>>> Reporter: Marc Betz
>>>> Assignee: Marc Betz
>>>> Fix For: 4.2
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>
Re: [RFC] stdcxx acknowledgments
Posted by Andrew Black <ab...@roguewave.com>.
Greetings all.
One thought that I have looking over the proposed patch is that it
doesn't include the names of people who have contribute code to the
release, but who aren't comitters. Scott Zhong and Travis Vitek both
have changes attributed to them, but neither name appears in the list.
I suspect there are others, but it would require a search through the
change logs to locate the changes in question.
--Andrew Black
Martin Sebor wrote:
> In the patch attached to the issue Marc proposes to replace
> the names of the original Rogue Wave "contributors" to the
> project (which included support engineers as well management)
> with those of stdcxx committers (including Emeriti). I'd like
> to request people's opinion on this change. I personally am
> not entirely comfortable dropping all the contributors that
> predate stdcxx, although perhaps it may not be inappropriate
> (sorry for the double negative) to pare it down to people who
> contributed significant code and/or documentation changes).
>
> What do others think?
>
> Martin
>
> Marc Betz (JIRA) wrote:
>> [
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/STDCXX-505?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
>> ]
>>
>> Marc Betz updated STDCXX-505:
>> -----------------------------
>>
>> Attachment: (was: acknow.html)
>>
>>> Update the Acknowledgments page
>>> -------------------------------
>>>
>>> Key: STDCXX-505
>>> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/STDCXX-505
>>> Project: C++ Standard Library
>>> Issue Type: Sub-task
>>> Components: Documentation
>>> Affects Versions: 4.1.2, 4.1.3, 4.1.4
>>> Reporter: Marc Betz
>>> Assignee: Marc Betz
>>> Fix For: 4.2
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
Re: [RFC] stdcxx acknowledgments
Posted by Liviu Nicoara <li...@roguewave.com>.
Martin Sebor wrote:
> [...]
> It occurs to me that we might be able to preempt a potentially
> contentious discussion by replacing the stdcxx Acknowledgment
> page with one describing the pre-stdcxx history of the project
> where we could retain any or all the names from the current
> acknowledgment page without having to tackle the delicate issue
> of who from the stdcxx community deserves to be mentioned.
FWIW, it seems to me that separate acknowledgment pages are required.
Liviu
Re: [RFC] stdcxx acknowledgments
Posted by Michael van der Westhuizen <r1...@gmail.com>.
On 10/3/07, Martin Sebor <se...@roguewave.com> wrote:
> Martin Sebor wrote:
[snip]
> It occurs to me that we might be able to preempt a potentially
> contentious discussion by replacing the stdcxx Acknowledgment
> page with one describing the pre-stdcxx history of the project
> where we could retain any or all the names from the current
> acknowledgment page without having to tackle the delicate issue
> of who from the stdcxx community deserves to be mentioned.
+1
My first reaction was that it would be unfair towards prior
contributors to entirely remove references to them.
Your proposal seems fair to me - it acknowledges history while
allowing stdcxx to have its own identity.
Michael
Re: [RFC] stdcxx acknowledgments
Posted by Justin Erenkrantz <ju...@erenkrantz.com>.
On Oct 2, 2007 3:01 PM, Martin Sebor <se...@roguewave.com> wrote:
> It occurs to me that we might be able to preempt a potentially
> contentious discussion by replacing the stdcxx Acknowledgment
> page with one describing the pre-stdcxx history of the project
> where we could retain any or all the names from the current
> acknowledgment page without having to tackle the delicate issue
> of who from the stdcxx community deserves to be mentioned.
+1. -- justin
Re: [RFC] stdcxx acknowledgments
Posted by Martin Sebor <se...@roguewave.com>.
Martin Sebor wrote:
> In the patch attached to the issue Marc proposes to replace
> the names of the original Rogue Wave "contributors" to the
> project (which included support engineers as well management)
> with those of stdcxx committers (including Emeriti). I'd like
> to request people's opinion on this change. I personally am
> not entirely comfortable dropping all the contributors that
> predate stdcxx, although perhaps it may not be inappropriate
> (sorry for the double negative) to pare it down to people who
> contributed significant code and/or documentation changes).
I should also add that, at the same time, I'm not sure it would
be completely fair to acknowledge stdcxx committers who have
never committed any code, created issues, or participated on
the lists.
Also, looking at Marc's patch more closely, I don't see either
of our Mentors listed.
It occurs to me that we might be able to preempt a potentially
contentious discussion by replacing the stdcxx Acknowledgment
page with one describing the pre-stdcxx history of the project
where we could retain any or all the names from the current
acknowledgment page without having to tackle the delicate issue
of who from the stdcxx community deserves to be mentioned.
Opinions please? Note that this issue needs to be resolved for
4.2.0.
Martin
>
> What do others think?
>
> Martin
>
> Marc Betz (JIRA) wrote:
>> [
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/STDCXX-505?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
>> ]
>>
>> Marc Betz updated STDCXX-505:
>> -----------------------------
>>
>> Attachment: (was: acknow.html)
>>
>>> Update the Acknowledgments page
>>> -------------------------------
>>>
>>> Key: STDCXX-505
>>> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/STDCXX-505
>>> Project: C++ Standard Library
>>> Issue Type: Sub-task
>>> Components: Documentation
>>> Affects Versions: 4.1.2, 4.1.3, 4.1.4
>>> Reporter: Marc Betz
>>> Assignee: Marc Betz
>>> Fix For: 4.2
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>