You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to adffaces-dev@incubator.apache.org by Adam Winer <aw...@gmail.com> on 2007/03/01 02:49:25 UTC
Re: @author tags
I agree as well. There's something a little nice about
@author tags as a way of giving credit to the people
who aren't the obvious people on a project. But they're
rarely kept up to date, and the implication of ownership
is not very OSS-friendly.
-- Adam
On 2/26/07, Craig McClanahan <cr...@apache.org> wrote:
> On 2/26/07, Scott O'Bryan <da...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > -1 for removing them. I don't see this as an "ownership" issue. It's
> > helpful to know who in the community might be able to answer questions
> > on a particular piece of code. I know with the Portal work I did, it
> > was very handy to know WHO had written a piece of code, especially since
> > they may not me monitoring the lists.
> >
>
> This argument does not scale in the long term. My own experience is a
> case in point -- my name is still splattered over lots of the Catalina
> sources inside Tomcat, even though:
>
> * I have not worked on them for four years (but I still get >20 personal
> emails for Tomcat help every week).
>
> * In many cases, the number of lines of code that were "mine" originally
> is less than half of the total -- so the tag is totally misleading.
>
> * The real people you want to talk to are the ones who have been making
> recent commits, not whoever wrote the code in the first place.
>
> I am strongly i+1 on removing @author tags, for the community related
> reasons that have been previously published.
>
> Craig McClanahan
>
Re: @author tags
Posted by Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org>.
to be honest;in an open source development, we all don't really like
to be bothered by something. We all are free to do what ever we want.
nobody of us want sb. to be his dev. leader. what we've done so far is
good. it is all up to US!!!
On 3/1/07, Simon Lessard <si...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Not exactly, SVN show only the name of the commiter, not the actual
> developper. However it's true that with SVN log you can get the JIRA issue
> number and then see who made the patch.
>
> On 3/1/07, Mike Kienenberger <mk...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > There's already a system in place that tracks the changes and who made
> > them. It's called svn :-)
> > It's going to be far more accurate and complete than a system you
> > maintain manually :-)
> >
> > On 2/28/07, Simon Lessard <si...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > I'm +0 about it. I think it's nice to know who wrote a piece of code
> > before
> > > you modify it, so you can ask a quick question to the author. The main
> > > example I can find in Trinidad is the use of Hashtable and Vector every
> > now
> > > and then, was it because of the old 1.2 codebase or was synchronization
> > > required? A simple mail to the author would have answered that question.
> > > Then again, I can see Craig's point as well as ASF concerns. The best
> > > compromise I can find is maintaining a history of changes in the Javadoc
> > > with the author names, but I really don't think many of us (starting
> > with
> > > me) will have the patience to keep such a thing up-to-date, hence the
> > +0.
> >
>
--
Matthias Wessendorf
http://tinyurl.com/fmywh
further stuff:
blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf
mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com
Re: @author tags
Posted by Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org>.
also, the contrib. file, martin proposed is a good thing
-M
On 3/2/07, Adam Winer <aw...@gmail.com> wrote:
> We should be including the name of the patch author in
> every checkin message. I used to be in that habit,
> got out of it, and I'm trying to do a better job with it lately.
>
> -- Adam
>
>
> On 3/1/07, Simon Lessard <si...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Not exactly, SVN show only the name of the commiter, not the actual
> > developper. However it's true that with SVN log you can get the JIRA issue
> > number and then see who made the patch.
> >
> > On 3/1/07, Mike Kienenberger <mk...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > There's already a system in place that tracks the changes and who made
> > > them. It's called svn :-)
> > > It's going to be far more accurate and complete than a system you
> > > maintain manually :-)
> > >
> > > On 2/28/07, Simon Lessard <si...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > I'm +0 about it. I think it's nice to know who wrote a piece of code
> > > before
> > > > you modify it, so you can ask a quick question to the author. The main
> > > > example I can find in Trinidad is the use of Hashtable and Vector
> > every
> > > now
> > > > and then, was it because of the old 1.2 codebase or was
> > synchronization
> > > > required? A simple mail to the author would have answered that
> > question.
> > > > Then again, I can see Craig's point as well as ASF concerns. The best
> > > > compromise I can find is maintaining a history of changes in the
> > Javadoc
> > > > with the author names, but I really don't think many of us (starting
> > > with
> > > > me) will have the patience to keep such a thing up-to-date, hence the
> > > +0.
> > >
> >
>
--
Matthias Wessendorf
http://tinyurl.com/fmywh
further stuff:
blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf
mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com
Re: @author tags
Posted by Adam Winer <aw...@gmail.com>.
We should be including the name of the patch author in
every checkin message. I used to be in that habit,
got out of it, and I'm trying to do a better job with it lately.
-- Adam
On 3/1/07, Simon Lessard <si...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Not exactly, SVN show only the name of the commiter, not the actual
> developper. However it's true that with SVN log you can get the JIRA issue
> number and then see who made the patch.
>
> On 3/1/07, Mike Kienenberger <mk...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > There's already a system in place that tracks the changes and who made
> > them. It's called svn :-)
> > It's going to be far more accurate and complete than a system you
> > maintain manually :-)
> >
> > On 2/28/07, Simon Lessard <si...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > I'm +0 about it. I think it's nice to know who wrote a piece of code
> > before
> > > you modify it, so you can ask a quick question to the author. The main
> > > example I can find in Trinidad is the use of Hashtable and Vector
> every
> > now
> > > and then, was it because of the old 1.2 codebase or was
> synchronization
> > > required? A simple mail to the author would have answered that
> question.
> > > Then again, I can see Craig's point as well as ASF concerns. The best
> > > compromise I can find is maintaining a history of changes in the
> Javadoc
> > > with the author names, but I really don't think many of us (starting
> > with
> > > me) will have the patience to keep such a thing up-to-date, hence the
> > +0.
> >
>
Re: @author tags
Posted by Simon Lessard <si...@gmail.com>.
Not exactly, SVN show only the name of the commiter, not the actual
developper. However it's true that with SVN log you can get the JIRA issue
number and then see who made the patch.
On 3/1/07, Mike Kienenberger <mk...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> There's already a system in place that tracks the changes and who made
> them. It's called svn :-)
> It's going to be far more accurate and complete than a system you
> maintain manually :-)
>
> On 2/28/07, Simon Lessard <si...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > I'm +0 about it. I think it's nice to know who wrote a piece of code
> before
> > you modify it, so you can ask a quick question to the author. The main
> > example I can find in Trinidad is the use of Hashtable and Vector every
> now
> > and then, was it because of the old 1.2 codebase or was synchronization
> > required? A simple mail to the author would have answered that question.
> > Then again, I can see Craig's point as well as ASF concerns. The best
> > compromise I can find is maintaining a history of changes in the Javadoc
> > with the author names, but I really don't think many of us (starting
> with
> > me) will have the patience to keep such a thing up-to-date, hence the
> +0.
>
Re: @author tags
Posted by Mike Kienenberger <mk...@gmail.com>.
There's already a system in place that tracks the changes and who made
them. It's called svn :-)
It's going to be far more accurate and complete than a system you
maintain manually :-)
On 2/28/07, Simon Lessard <si...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I'm +0 about it. I think it's nice to know who wrote a piece of code before
> you modify it, so you can ask a quick question to the author. The main
> example I can find in Trinidad is the use of Hashtable and Vector every now
> and then, was it because of the old 1.2 codebase or was synchronization
> required? A simple mail to the author would have answered that question.
> Then again, I can see Craig's point as well as ASF concerns. The best
> compromise I can find is maintaining a history of changes in the Javadoc
> with the author names, but I really don't think many of us (starting with
> me) will have the patience to keep such a thing up-to-date, hence the +0.
Re: @author tags
Posted by Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org>.
On 3/1/07, Simon Lessard <si...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I'm +0 about it. I think it's nice to know who wrote a piece of code before
> you modify it, so you can ask a quick question to the author. The main
that quick question, really belongs to the mailing list.
> example I can find in Trinidad is the use of Hashtable and Vector every now
> and then, was it because of the old 1.2 codebase or was synchronization
> required? A simple mail to the author would have answered that question.
> Then again, I can see Craig's point as well as ASF concerns. The best
> compromise I can find is maintaining a history of changes in the Javadoc
> with the author names, but I really don't think many of us (starting with
> me) will have the patience to keep such a thing up-to-date, hence the +0.
Well, for now, I'll create an issue in jira to make sure that we will remove
these tags.
-M
> On 2/28/07, Adam Winer <aw...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > I agree as well. There's something a little nice about
> > @author tags as a way of giving credit to the people
> > who aren't the obvious people on a project. But they're
> > rarely kept up to date, and the implication of ownership
> > is not very OSS-friendly.
> >
> > -- Adam
> >
> >
> > On 2/26/07, Craig McClanahan <cr...@apache.org> wrote:
> > > On 2/26/07, Scott O'Bryan <da...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > -1 for removing them. I don't see this as an "ownership" issue. It's
> > > > helpful to know who in the community might be able to answer questions
> > > > on a particular piece of code. I know with the Portal work I did, it
> > > > was very handy to know WHO had written a piece of code, especially
> > since
> > > > they may not me monitoring the lists.
> > > >
> > >
> > > This argument does not scale in the long term. My own experience is a
> > > case in point -- my name is still splattered over lots of the Catalina
> > > sources inside Tomcat, even though:
> > >
> > > * I have not worked on them for four years (but I still get >20 personal
> > > emails for Tomcat help every week).
> > >
> > > * In many cases, the number of lines of code that were "mine" originally
> > > is less than half of the total -- so the tag is totally misleading.
> > >
> > > * The real people you want to talk to are the ones who have been making
> > > recent commits, not whoever wrote the code in the first place.
> > >
> > > I am strongly i+1 on removing @author tags, for the community related
> > > reasons that have been previously published.
> > >
> > > Craig McClanahan
> > >
> >
>
--
Matthias Wessendorf
http://tinyurl.com/fmywh
further stuff:
blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf
mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com
Re: @author tags
Posted by Simon Lessard <si...@gmail.com>.
I'm +0 about it. I think it's nice to know who wrote a piece of code before
you modify it, so you can ask a quick question to the author. The main
example I can find in Trinidad is the use of Hashtable and Vector every now
and then, was it because of the old 1.2 codebase or was synchronization
required? A simple mail to the author would have answered that question.
Then again, I can see Craig's point as well as ASF concerns. The best
compromise I can find is maintaining a history of changes in the Javadoc
with the author names, but I really don't think many of us (starting with
me) will have the patience to keep such a thing up-to-date, hence the +0.
On 2/28/07, Adam Winer <aw...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I agree as well. There's something a little nice about
> @author tags as a way of giving credit to the people
> who aren't the obvious people on a project. But they're
> rarely kept up to date, and the implication of ownership
> is not very OSS-friendly.
>
> -- Adam
>
>
> On 2/26/07, Craig McClanahan <cr...@apache.org> wrote:
> > On 2/26/07, Scott O'Bryan <da...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > -1 for removing them. I don't see this as an "ownership" issue. It's
> > > helpful to know who in the community might be able to answer questions
> > > on a particular piece of code. I know with the Portal work I did, it
> > > was very handy to know WHO had written a piece of code, especially
> since
> > > they may not me monitoring the lists.
> > >
> >
> > This argument does not scale in the long term. My own experience is a
> > case in point -- my name is still splattered over lots of the Catalina
> > sources inside Tomcat, even though:
> >
> > * I have not worked on them for four years (but I still get >20 personal
> > emails for Tomcat help every week).
> >
> > * In many cases, the number of lines of code that were "mine" originally
> > is less than half of the total -- so the tag is totally misleading.
> >
> > * The real people you want to talk to are the ones who have been making
> > recent commits, not whoever wrote the code in the first place.
> >
> > I am strongly i+1 on removing @author tags, for the community related
> > reasons that have been previously published.
> >
> > Craig McClanahan
> >
>