I agree with Marks position on this, the information of who committed has significant value.
Joel Bernstein http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/ On Wed, Jun 6, 2018 at 10:14 PM, Mark Miller <markrmil...@gmail.com> wrote: > I have the same opinion as last time. Taking ownership of actually > committing something to the code base is an important attribution and that > is why it has been included in CHANGES. I don't agree that it takes away > credit at all - via means the commit went through you, which is an accurate > reflection of things. Committing others work is a major contribution and > should be called out, for the positives that it creates as well as the > responsibility for that change you have undertaken by being a very key part > of the via route. > > - Mark > > On Wed, Jun 6, 2018 at 8:10 AM Yonik Seeley <ysee...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> I don't have much of an opinion about "via" one way or the other, >> however I think we should avoid using the mental model of authorship >> for CHANGES.txt. >> We've generally been listing people who made meaningful contributions >> to the patch, including sometimes the person who opened the issue for >> example. >> >> -Yonik >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org >> >> -- > - Mark > about.me/markrmiller >
