On Mon, Apr 6, 2026, 08:04 Bruce Momjian <[email protected]> wrote: > On Mon, Apr 6, 2026 at 10:56:49AM -0400, Andrew Dunstan wrote: > > > > On 2026-04-06 Mo 10:29 AM, Bruce Momjian wrote: > > > > I think having "Co-authored-by:" mean one thing when "Author" appears > > and a different thing when "Author" is missing is too confusing. > > > > > > > > Possibly. I think we're tying ourselves up in knots needlessly here, > though. To > > me, without having to interpret the exact meaning by consulting a wiki, > > Co-authored-by signifies that the person made a significant > contribution, but > > not as much as the Author(s). These things shouldn't be technical terms > of art. > > > > Personally, I'm in favor of being fairly liberal about giving release > note > > credits. > > So "Co-authored-by:" shows a level of involvement, but doesn't have any > effect on the major release notes. That works too. >
"Liberal" here means give it even for the lesser contributions. They should appear in the release notes. If everyone explicitly lists every author using the author tag for non-committer-only commits the rule that all authors are equal applies and we can move one with that preferred wording. Co-authors becomes unnecessary. But the usage as it stands historically is that co-authors are authors and if a commit doesn't have an explicit author the committer is one. We can leave that stand as historical and when people fall back on old habits. Maybe add Assisted-by if we want to introduce a intermediate level between author and reviewer. It does seem we failed to make that be co-author and redefining should be avoided. David J.
