You already know my views on this ridiculous scheme (for the others listening in, search the archives for penis comparison).
As for community needs, nobody in the community needs these authors names removed from the text, but on the other hand, the community does need documentation. There was nothing wrong with putting correct attribution in the text, so there is no reason to remove it now. In fact, it's a big f-you to those people. I strongly recommend that you put their names back. If you insist on removing good documentation over this retarded ideal, so be it, but don't expect me to contribute any further, nor to have me recommend anyone else waste their time either. --Wez. Philip Olson wrote: > > Hello Wez- > > The PHP manual does not insert author and company names like this and I > encouraged Gwynne to remove these attributions. We're researching a > method for crediting "sponsored" documentation but they should not be > treated in a special manner... all contributors and contributions should > be treated the same. In fact, the entire credits system (a topic that is > just about impossible to maintain) is being reevaluated at this time. > > The text did say we can "edit, combine, transform, rewrite, etc. as > suits the needs of the community" and the community does not write > credits like that nor does a commit imply that credits will be added > outside the CVS changelog. I am not prepared to discuss the credit > system as a whole but in time it will happen. If you/they require that > information to remain as is then I'd rather remove the docs and move on > but I doubt it will come to that. The work is appreciated but we must > remain fair and consistent and encourage everyone to feel free to edit > any and all documentation in the manual and never worry about when or > when not to add a persons name. > > Regards, > Philip > > On Jun 6, 2007, at 6:13 AM, Wez Furlong wrote: > >> Please put the attribution back, as a matter of courtesy to those >> authors efforts as they kindly donated those docs and don't otherwise >> have any way of being credited for their work. >> >> --Wez. >> >> PS: As a general rule of thumb, never remove any attribution, license or >> copyright information from a file unless you are 100% certain that it no >> longer applies. >> >> >> Buesching, Logan J wrote: >>> I thought all the docs we have and create were under an open license? >>> >>> ________________________________ >>> >>> From: Nuno Lopes [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >>> Sent: Wed 6/6/2007 8:32 AM >>> To: Gwynne Amaya Raskind >>> Cc: PHPdoc; [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>> Subject: Re: [PHP-DOC] cvs: phpdoc /en/internals/pdo building.xml >>> error-handling.xml implementing.xml index.xml intro.xml pdo-dbh-t.xml >>> pdo-stmt-t.xml preparation.xml prerequisites.xml >>> >>> >>> >>>> gwynne Wed Jun 6 05:20:48 2007 UTC >>>> >>>> Modified files: >>>> /phpdoc/en/internals/pdo building.xml error-handling.xml >>>> implementing.xml index.xml intro.xml >>>> pdo-dbh-t.xml pdo-stmt-t.xml >>>> preparation.xml prerequisites.xml >>>> Log: >>>> - Fixed several spelling and grammatical errors in the PDO >>>> documentation. >>>> - Removed displayed author information from the PDO documentation >>>> front >>>> page. >>> >>> I don't know if that is legal. You need to check out what was the >>> agreement >>> with IBM for distribution of those docs. Maybe Wez can help on this >>> subject? >>> >>> Nuno >>> >>> >>> >>
