forrest-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From David Crossley <cross...@apache.org>
Subject Re: attributions in status.xml
Date Fri, 09 Jun 2006 03:56:57 GMT
David Crossley wrote:
> Ross Gardler wrote:
> > >Author: crossley
> > 
> > >+      <action context="code" type="add" dev="RDG" importance="high" 
> > >fixes-bug="FOR-200">
> > 
> > Whilst I did do large portion of this work, there were others who 
> > contributed and the naming convention was an output from Tim and I on a 
> > Forrest Friday.
> 
> You were the main instigator. That is why i attributed
> it to you.
> 
> The naming convention is already there as a separate
> entry so i will enhance and separate.
> 
> Now to your general thrust about group attribution.
> 
> Yes, i had agonised for ages about how do do the
> abovementioned entry and some others.
> 
> > Is it a good idea (or even possible) to have dev="community" on an 
> > action like this?
> 
> Yes i reckon that is a good idea. Perhaps also some
> qualifying text on such entries.

Thinking some more about this.

The purpose of that @dev attribute is to note the
committer who went to all that effort to accept the
patch and actually add it to our SVN. Or to convert
a community decision into actual code. This is big,
and deserves attribution. Such efforts are vital.

The @due-to attribute is for thanking contributors
who are not committers.

We also have a proposal or two in our archives, to use
committer Id rather than these RDG, DC, TWW, etc. for
the @dev attribute, so probably should not overload it.

So i have used a mixture of due-to="Community" and
specific text notes for such entries. Perhaps we can
improve this later, but this will get us by for now.

-David

Mime
View raw message