Hello,
Currently we do this in CHANGES.txt:
LUCENE-:
Fixed a horrible nasty bug. (Joe Contributor via John Doe Committer)
I propose we remove "via " from CHANGES.txt. I don't
think any users care about who committed changes and I think it
de-emphasizes the actual contribu
+1
Mike McCandless
http://blog.mikemccandless.com
On Tue, Jun 5, 2012 at 6:40 PM, Robert Muir wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Currently we do this in CHANGES.txt:
>
> LUCENE-:
> Fixed a horrible nasty bug. (Joe Contributor via John Doe Committer)
>
> I propose we remove &q
: LUCENE-:
: Fixed a horrible nasty bug. (Joe Contributor via John Doe Committer)
:
: I propose we remove "via " from CHANGES.txt. I don't
FWIW: as first glance i thought you were suggesting that we should only
use "(Joe Contributor, John Doe Committer)" ... whi
On Wed, Jun 6, 2012 at 12:57 AM, Chris Hostetter
wrote:
>
> It seems (on second glance) that you are actually arguing that that the
> person who runs "svn commit" should get zero credit in CHANGES.txt --
> unless they actually contributed to the development of the patch.
>
Yes... I think it shoul
+1
Steve
-Original Message-
From: Robert Muir [mailto:rcm...@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, June 05, 2012 6:40 PM
To: dev@lucene.apache.org
Subject: remove "via"
Hello,
Currently we do this in CHANGES.txt:
LUCENE-:
Fixed a horrible nasty bug. (Joe Contributor via John Doe
+1.
On Wed, Jun 6, 2012 at 1:27 AM, Steven A Rowe wrote:
> +1
>
> Steve
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Robert Muir [mailto:rcm...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, June 05, 2012 6:40 PM
> To: dev@lucene.apache.org
> Subject: remove "via"
>
> Hel
2012/6/6 Robert Muir
> Hello,
>
> Currently we do this in CHANGES.txt:
>
> LUCENE-:
> Fixed a horrible nasty bug. (Joe Contributor via John Doe Committer)
>
> I propose we remove "via " from CHANGES.txt. I don't
> think any users care about
S.txt:
>>
>> LUCENE-:
>> Fixed a horrible nasty bug. (Joe Contributor via John Doe Committer)
>>
>> I propose we remove "via " from CHANGES.txt. I don't
>> think any users care about who committed changes and I think it
>> de-emphasizes the
On Jun 5, 2012, at 6:40 PM, Robert Muir wrote:
> Opinions?
I disagree - I think it makes it really easy to track who actually did the
commit (the person *responsible* if it's a bad commit or a good commit) and I
think there is some credit in a committer applying someones patch. They are
doing
> code change. I think *via* is pretty clear regarding credit, and I think it
> has value in it's information. Even if you simply commit someone else work,
> *you* are contributing to the issue. You better have reviewed it, you better
> be willing to take responsibility for it.
I don't think th
I've looked at the "via" in the changelog to figure out which committer works
in which areas the most, and therefore who to ping about a patch. And I do
think that shepherding a patch file through to commit is worthy of some credit.
It's often a fair amount of work to evaluate a patch file, of
On Jun 6, 2012, at 8:26 AM, Dawid Weiss wrote:
> If you have contributed to
> the issue and your gut feeling is you're part of the patch's effort,
> you should include yourself as the author.
Personally, I prefer the current std - where a strong review and the taking of
responsibility earns yo
ne 06, 2012 2:33 PM
> To: dev@lucene.apache.org
> Subject: Re: remove "via"
>
> I've looked at the "via" in the changelog to figure out which committer
works in
> which areas the most, and therefore who to ping about a patch. And I do
think
> that sheph
ons.com]
>> Sent: Wednesday, June 06, 2012 2:33 PM
>> To: dev@lucene.apache.org
>> Subject: Re: remove "via"
>>
>> I've looked at the "via" in the changelog to figure out which committer
> works in
>> which areas the most, and there
>
> Yes... I think it should be:
>
> LUCENE-:
> Fixed a horrible nasty bug. (Joe Contributor)
>
>
I think it's very clear who the author was with:
LUCENE-:
Fixed a horrible nasty bug. (Joe Contributor via Mr Committer)
I agree that committers should be generous and low key about their o
On 06/06/2012 00:40, Robert Muir wrote:
Hello,
Currently we do this in CHANGES.txt:
LUCENE-:
Fixed a horrible nasty bug. (Joe Contributor via John Doe Committer)
I propose we remove "via" from CHANGES.txt. I don't
think any users care about who committed changes an
: I've looked at the "via" in the changelog to figure out which committer
: works in which areas the most, and therefore who to ping about a patch.
That's a user for the info that i hadn't really considered, and definitely
gives me pause...
I guess i'm changing my opinion: -0.
-Hoss
---
Following where Hoss bravely leads, I'll change too to -0
Erick
On Wed, Jun 6, 2012 at 1:56 PM, Chris Hostetter
wrote:
>
> : I've looked at the "via" in the changelog to figure out which committer
> : works in which areas the most, and therefore who to ping about a patch.
>
> That's a user for t
My initial +1 was because I guess I don't care if it's either way. As
far as important stuff is done I wouldn't worry about who gets the
credit...
Dawid
On Wed, Jun 6, 2012 at 8:03 PM, Erick Erickson wrote:
> Following where Hoss bravely leads, I'll change too to -0
>
> Erick
>
> On Wed, Jun 6,
On Jun 6, 2012, at 2:45 PM, Dawid Weiss wrote:
> As
> far as important stuff is done I wouldn't worry about who gets the
> credit...
I think that's kind of short sighted. These credits matter to some, and many of
these things, while they may not matter to us personally, that does not make
them
I think I understand your viewpoint but I'll stick with mine for now
(that is: I don't care for 'via' attribution in CHANGES.txt, but I
also don't object it -- I'll stick with whatever consensus there will
be).
Dawid
On Wed, Jun 6, 2012 at 9:54 PM, Mark Miller wrote:
>
> On Jun 6, 2012, at 2:45
lr-3-enterprise-search-server/book
--
View this message in context:
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/remove-via-tp3987871p3988237.html
Sent from the Lucene - Java Developer mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
-
To unsubscribe, e-mai
I dont think there is any consensus here. Lets just keep it as-is.
On Tue, Jun 5, 2012 at 6:40 PM, Robert Muir wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Currently we do this in CHANGES.txt:
>
> LUCENE-:
> Fixed a horrible nasty bug. (Joe Contributor via John Doe Committer)
>
> I propo
23 matches
Mail list logo
