Mailing-List: contact dev-help@commons.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: "Commons Developers List" <dev@commons.apache.org>
Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of sebbaz@gmail.com designates
 209.85.216.178 as permitted sender)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
        h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to
         :content-type:content-transfer-encoding;
        b=Sey8pjjVpmTcdgK7CIQ/mdvu4ftDhPMRqYJ+nrbVVmwiXUt8B++4OmX+8wOYyW25pZ
         VByVV97pb7/yTbPQiBoKp4JM7KkAeK0fWgsKd08wZXmaLKAaiCuXnNWDjvaCBG7DrNbi
         QH291ltQ+Y3XiJkQ34ZJ/XhJgAdmNpJv4/4u4=
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <ineg16$fj3$1@dough.gmane.org>
References: <BANLkTikEa6GNSghx5VidxgNqi3nmKxxcVA@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTimzJKa-pqyRJNO1VarT=sb7zVYEOA@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTikFAULnanwA-YqrEW8DNq9N6uTGYA@mail.gmail.com>
	<4D9A36A8.7080803@gmail.com>
	<BANLkTimA34GpAyG+dgDDmJQ3S3Lj6sEEWw@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTinfU4Ou8WY+c==7t5KZgqYqzfSjcg@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTi=jUy7Ngk1CLa+TOxcdTDHMdids7Q@mail.gmail.com>
	<ineg16$fj3$1@dough.gmane.org>
Date: Tue, 5 Apr 2011 12:07:26 +0100
Message-ID: <BANLkTinqJCOjvDrk0mj-BiXOVPbbRiny3Q@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [ALL] @authors tags
From: sebb <sebbaz@gmail.com>
To: Commons Developers List <dev@commons.apache.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On 5 April 2011 08:23, J=F6rg Schaible <joerg.schaible@scalaris.com> wrote:
> Henri Yandell wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 10:31 PM, Henri Yandell <flamefew@gmail.com> wrot=
e:
>>> On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 9:28 PM, Christian Grobmeier <grobmeier@gmail.co=
m>
>>> wrote:
>>>> On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 11:22 PM, Phil Steitz <phil.steitz@gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>> On 4/4/11 2:18 PM, Torsten Curdt wrote:
>>>>>>> I thought we had settled on '@author Apache Software Foundation',
>>>>>> Did we? TBH I find that pretty pointless and nothing more than noise=
.
>>>>>> I'd be in favor of removing them all together.
>>>>> I agree with Torsten. =A0I got stalled in DBCP/pool because at least
>>>>> some ppl thought we needed to get permission from all of the long
>>>>> gone @authors to nuke their tags. =A0Personally, I am ready to just
>>>>> nuke 'em if others do not object.
>>>>
>>>> I am +1 for nuking and +1 for documenting the "no @author tags" decisi=
on
>>>
>>> +1, and done for Lang.
>>
>> Btw:
>>
>> for i in `find . -type f -name '*.java'`; do (echo 'g/@author/d'; echo
>> 'w') | ed $i; done
>>
>> and check with svn diff of course :)
>
> sed -i -s -e '/@author/d' `find . -type f -name '*.java'`
>
> SCNR :)

+1 to removing @author tags, but I think the removed names should be
added to the developer / contributor list or a readme file somewhere.
Even if their code has been completely replaced, they have
participated in the development of the component.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org