On Thu, Feb 26, 2004 at 07:00:09PM +0100, Torsten Curdt wrote: > Steven Noels wrote: > >On 26 Feb 2004, at 17:12, Torsten Curdt wrote: > > > >>+ and we remove all author tags > > > > > >I find this just a little bit too reactionary - especially for the > >little known/used areas of code. We haven't had "ownership issues" > >because of them in the past, not? These tags sometimes help to find a > >contact, when questions remain unanswered on the list. > > Well, a lot of people gave their +1 > > I am far from pushing this - actually I see it exactly like you do. > > ...but IIRC the board explicitly discouraged the author tag and > we also had a lengthy discussion about this. Since we need to > update the license anyway, I thought this might be the right time > to follow the board's advice.
Just to clarify my +1... I do NOT think removing the author tags is a generally good idea. I voted +1 because since (unless I misinterpreted) the board is just about requiring it, so I thought why not do it now. An author tag just says this person put significant work into this file. Since there is no copyright notice next to the @author tag, and there IS a clear license or reference to a license right above it *with a copyright notice and the name of the copyright holder* I have a hard time seeing how the board finds a problem with the presence of the author tags. If the board makes us (or convinces us that it is best to) remove the tags then I do not have a problem with my name leaving with the rest of the names, but I will think this is a silly way to "encourage" voluntary collaborative development. --Tim Larson
