Let me clarify - it's not precludes efforts. I'm just saying that it is optional - if author tag exists - fine, if not - fine too. I'm not completely against removal of author tags - I'm just seeing it from diferent prospective - in case it's needed to get full list of contributors - we may automate that process of getting list of contributors - without restricting these tags - thats all. Sergiy From: John Verhaeg <jverhaeg(a)redhat.com&gt; To: Sergey Litsenko <litsenko_sergey(a)yahoo.com&gt; Cc: dna-dev(a)lists.jboss.org Sent: Friday, 16 January, 2009 4:29:27 AM Subject: Re: [dna-dev] Re: @author tags in our codebase I'm not completely sold on this, but I don't really have much of an argument against it either, beyond worrying that potential contributors might not feel they're getting "enough" attribution without the direct tie-in between the source and their names. Not sure if I understand Sergey's comments about accepting contributor efforts - how does this preclude those efforts? Other than that, I'd give a +1. John Verhaeg Red Hat, Inc. (314) 336-2950 ----- "Sergey Litsenko" <litsenko_sergey(a)yahoo.com&gt; wrote: | | | -1 | It is optional - would be better to allow keeping authors tags while automating process of getting full list. | | On one hand, I'm not sold on the idea that if the author tag will be removed it might help to brought more commiters. If I see some issue in the source code and I know how to fix it - I'll provide a patch/fix whetever I'm in the "magic list" or not. | | The only question that might be asked: are OSS team members interested in accepting such contributor's efforts or not? | It's about mentality and maturity of committers as well as part of OSS project's culture established by team members - e.g. responding to user questions, issues, etc - in e-mails, users forums, etc and welcoming user's opinions on how things should work (functional requirements). Also you can use something like following: "@author DNA Expert Group" for classes/packages designed / developed by group of authors. | | Generally, I believe that everything that is part of Java Language specification (e.g.) and/or part of general practices is valid and justified to be part of any source code. | | On the other hand, since it's possible to automate process of getting list of autors from both - SCM repository and source code/ POM - maintenance would not be that hard, and IMO efforts should go that way rather than removing tags. I bet that I can find some maven plugin or develop my own to automate that process. For example, http://www.statsvn.org and http://stat-scm.sourceforge.net are good starting points. | | I will vote "+2" on the ability to automate process of getting full list of contributors (maven report plugin) and makit it part of distribution and Maven project site. | | Sergiy | | | From: &quot;dna-dev-request(a)lists.jboss.org&quot; <dna-dev-request(a)lists.jboss.org > | To: dna-dev(a)lists.jboss.org | Sent: Wednesday, 14 January, 2009 6:43:27 PM | Subject: dna-dev Digest, Vol 10, Issue 5 | | Send dna-dev mailing list submissions to | dna-dev(a)lists.jboss.org | | To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit | https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/dna-dev | or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to | dna-dev-request(a)lists.jboss.org | | You can reach the person managing the list at | dna-dev-owner(a)lists.jboss.org | | When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific | than "Re: Contents of dna-dev digest..." | | | Today's Topics: | | 1. Re: @author tags in our codebase (Randall Hauch) | 2. Re: @author tags in our codebase (Vatsal) | | | ---------------------------------------------------------------------- | | Message: 1 | Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2009 16:03:23 -0600 | From: Randall Hauch <rhauch(a)redhat.com&gt; | Subject: Re: [dna-dev] @author tags in our codebase | To: JBoss DNA <dna-dev(a)lists.jboss.org&gt; | Message-ID: <160467FE-4D64-4943-BBAC-3D9535FD670C(a)redhat.com&gt; | Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" | | We never really came to a consensus on this question, and I'd like to | try to do that. To be clear, here is the proposal: | | 1) Remove the @author lines from the code, and instead rely upon SVN | as the official master record of individual contributions | 2) Change the Eclipse preference files to remove the @author lines | from the code templates | 3) Add a AUTHORS file to the distribution(s); this file will contain | the names and email addresses for all contributors, and can even allow | a contributor to describe their contribution if they so desire. | 4) Change the headers to remove the "@author" wording and to replace | it with "See the AUTHORS file in the | distribution for a full listing of individual contributors." | 5) Change the POM files to include the AUTHORS file in each | distribution. | | The AUTHORS file would look like this: | | Randall Hauch (rhauch(a)redhat.com) | John Verhaeg (jverhaeg(a)redhat.com) | Dan Florian (dflorian(a)redhat.com) | Stefano Maestri (stefano.maestri(a)javalinux.it) | Serge Pagop (Serge.Pagop(a)innoq.com) | Michael Trezzi (michael(a)mathwizard.org) | Alexandre Porcelli (porcelli(a)devexp.com.br) | Sergiy Litsenko (litsenko_sergey(a)yahoo.com) | | Note that unlike the @author tags, this file will list all | contributors, and the names of new contributors will be appended to | the list by the project lead. (No names will be removed from this | file.) | | I would prefer to hear from every contributor, so please respond with | +1 if you agree with this proposal, 0 if you don't care, or -1 if you | want to keep the @author tags. If you vehemently want to keep the | @author tags and names in the source file, please say so. | | Best regards, | | Randall | | On Nov 18, 2008, at 3:33 PM, Randall Hauch wrote: | | > | > On Nov 18, 2008, at 2:52 PM, Stefano Maestri wrote: | > | >> | >> Randall Hauch wrote on 17/11/08 22:17: | >>> I've recently read a suggestions for open source communities that | >>> the | >>> author names are removed from the content. In the case of DNA's | >>> codebase, that would mean removing the @author tags. | >> May I ask where? | > | > I knew someone was going to ask. :-) I had to go back and look, but | > here are a few: | > http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4216011961522818645&ei=8o0YS... | > http://docs.ofbiz.org/display/OFBADMIN/Coding+Conventions | > http://subversion.tigris.org/hacking.html#other-conventions | > http://blogs.sun.com/ahe/entry/author_tags | > | >> | >>> | >>> tags: | >>> | >>> 1. When there are no @author tags, then there is a far smaller | >>> notion of ownership by the author(s). On one side of this, the | >>> author(s) may not appreciate changes to "their" code, and on the | >>> other side, non-authors may feel intimidated about working on | >>> code for which they are not an author. IMO, we want to | >>> _discourage_ ownership and _encourage_ everyone to work in any | >>> area of the code they want. | >>> | >> +1...but is really @author tag intimating someone, or giving | >> ownership | >> to some other? Quiet frankly not for me. | > | > I hope it doesn't discourage people from contributing and diving in | > wherever they want. BTW, it's quite possible that no matter what | > our policy, some people may not like it. For example, if we were to | > adopt a policy of NOT including @author tags, some people may refuse | > to join the community because they see the @author tag as proof they | > worked on it. It takes all kinds of people. :-) | > | >> | >> Anyway I agree on the _discurage_ownership and _encourage_everyone to | >> work in any area, so if it can help, remove @author tag. | >> | >>> 1. @author tags can be inaccurate. SVN has the true history of who | >>> contributed exactly what code. | >>> | >> +1 | > | > IMO, this is perhaps the biggest justifiable reason. Its rubbish if | > its not up-to-date, so it seems far better to not have @author tags. | > | >> | >>> | >>> The only benefit I can think of is that the @author tag does help to | >>> give some notion of who is the "expert" of the class, in case they | >>> need to be consulted. However, I don't believe this is really | >>> much of | >>> a reason, since it's far better to consult the SVN history and see | >>> who | >>> actually modified the different parts of the code. In fact, the | >>> annotated views in Fisheye even show on many of the lines the name | >>> of | >>> the last person to change it. For example, | >>> see http://fisheye.jboss.org/browse/DNA/trunk/dna-common/src/main/java/org/jb... | >>> | >> abosolutely better to use fisheye...if fine people of JBoss.org would | >> also mind to upgrade it to a more recent version it would be even | >> better. Also Jira integration may help a lot. | >> | >> I would just add that if we decide to remove the tag we have to | >> change | >> also the license information at the beginnig of any file which say: | >> /* 2 | >> <http://fisheye.jboss.org/browse/DNA/trunk/dna-graph/src/main/java/org/jbo... | >> > | >> * JBoss, Home of Professional Open Source. 3 | >> <http://fisheye.jboss.org/browse/DNA/trunk/dna-graph/src/main/java/org/jbo... | >> > | >> * Copyright 2008, Red Hat Middleware LLC, and individual | >> contributors 4 | >> <http://fisheye.jboss.org/browse/DNA/trunk/dna-graph/src/main/java/org/jbo... | >> > | >> * as indicated by the @author tags. See the copyright.txt file in | >> the 5 | >> <http://fisheye.jboss.org/browse/DNA/trunk/dna-graph/src/main/java/org/jbo... | >> > | >> * distribution for a full listing of individual contributors. | >> | > | > Yes, we'd have to update the headers. | > | > Best regards, | > | > Randall | > | | -------------- next part -------------- | An HTML attachment was scrubbed... | URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/dna-dev/attachments/20090113/d2486bd9/at... | | ------------------------------ | | Message: 2 | Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 13:13:23 +0530 | From: Vatsal <vatsal.avasthi(a)gmail.com&gt; | Subject: Re: [dna-dev] @author tags in our codebase | To: dna-dev(a)lists.jboss.org | Message-ID: | <c82836c60901132343w54b690a9ha9c183e5ee61d019(a)mail.gmail.com&gt; | Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" | | Sometimes it is fun to see your name in author tag of a project at a later | date when the project has matured but my vote would be for Randall's | suggestions due to practical & maintenance reasons discussed earlier, so a | +1 from me for this proposal(though I am not a contributor yet :) )... | - Vatsal | | On Wed, Jan 14, 2009 at 3:33 AM, Randall Hauch <rhauch(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: | | > We never really came to a consensus on this question, and I'd like to try | > to do that. To be clear, here is the proposal: | > | > 1) Remove the @author lines from the code, and instead rely upon SVN as the | > official master record of individual contributions | > 2) Change the Eclipse preference files to remove the @author lines from the | > code templates | > 3) Add a AUTHORS file to the distribution(s); this file will contain the | > names and email addresses for all contributors, and can even allow a | > contributor to describe their contribution if they so desire. | > 4) Change the headers to remove the "@author" wording and to replace it | > with "See the AUTHORS file in the | > distribution for a full listing of individual contributors." | > 5) Change the POM files to include the AUTHORS file in each distribution. | > | > The AUTHORS file would look like this: | > | > Randall Hauch (rhauch(a)redhat.com) | > | > John Verhaeg (jverhaeg(a)redhat.com) | > Dan Florian (dflorian(a)redhat.com) | > Stefano Maestri (stefano.maestri(a)javalinux.it) | > Serge Pagop (Serge.Pagop(a)innoq.com) | > Michael Trezzi (michael(a)mathwizard.org) | > Alexandre Porcelli (porcelli(a)devexp.com.br) | > Sergiy Litsenko (litsenko_sergey(a)yahoo.com) | > | > | > Note that unlike the @author tags, this file will list all contributors, | > and the names of new contributors will be appended to the list by the | > project lead. (No names will be removed from this file.) | > | > I would prefer to hear from every contributor, so please respond with +1 if | > you agree with this proposal, 0 if you don't care, or -1 if you want to keep | > the @author tags. If you vehemently want to keep the @author tags and names | > in the source file, please say so. | > | > Best regards, | > | > Randall | > | > On Nov 18, 2008, at 3:33 PM, Randall Hauch wrote: | > | > | > On Nov 18, 2008, at 2:52 PM, Stefano Maestri wrote: | > | > | > Randall Hauch wrote on 17/11/08 22:17: | > | > I've recently read a suggestions for open source communities that the | > | > author names are removed from the content. In the case of DNA's | > | > codebase, that would mean removing the @author tags. | > | > May I ask where? | > | > | > I knew someone was going to ask. :-) I had to go back and look, but here | > are a few: | > | > http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4216011961522818645&ei=8o0YS... | > http://docs.ofbiz.org/display/OFBADMIN/Coding+Conventions | > http://subversion.tigris.org/hacking.html#other-conventions | > http://blogs.sun.com/ahe/entry/author_tags | > | > | > | > tags: | > | > | > 1. When there are no @author tags, then there is a far smaller | > | > notion of ownership by the author(s). On one side of this, the | > | > author(s) may not appreciate changes to "their" code, and on the | > | > other side, non-authors may feel intimidated about working on | > | > code for which they are not an author. IMO, we want to | > | > _discourage_ ownership and _encourage_ everyone to work in any | > | > area of the code they want. | > | > | > +1...but is really @author tag intimating someone, or giving ownership | > | > to some other? Quiet frankly not for me. | > | > | > I hope it doesn't discourage people from contributing and diving in | > wherever they want. BTW, it's quite possible that no matter what our | > policy, some people may not like it. For example, if we were to adopt a | > policy of NOT including @author tags, some people may refuse to join the | > community because they see the @author tag as proof they worked on it. It | > takes all kinds of people. :-) | > | > | > Anyway I agree on the _discurage_ownership and _encourage_everyone to | > | > work in any area, so if it can help, remove @author tag. | > | > | > 1. @author tags can be inaccurate. SVN has the true history of who | > | > contributed exactly what code. | > | > | > +1 | > | > | > IMO, this is perhaps the biggest justifiable reason. Its rubbish if its | > not up-to-date, so it seems far better to not have @author tags. | > | > | > | > The only benefit I can think of is that the @author tag does help to | > | > give some notion of who is the "expert" of the class, in case they | > | > need to be consulted. However, I don't believe this is really much of | > | > a reason, since it's far better to consult the SVN history and see who | > | > actually modified the different parts of the code. In fact, the | > | > annotated views in Fisheye even show on many of the lines the name of | > | > the last person to change it. For example, | > | > see | > http://fisheye.jboss.org/browse/DNA/trunk/dna-common/src/main/java/org/jb... | > | > | > abosolutely better to use fisheye...if fine people of JBoss.org would | > | > also mind to upgrade it to a more recent version it would be even | > | > better. Also Jira integration may help a lot. | > | > | > I would just add that if we decide to remove the tag we have to change | > | > also the license information at the beginnig of any file which say: | > | > /* 2 | > | > < | > http://fisheye.jboss.org/browse/DNA/trunk/dna-graph/src/main/java/org/jbo... | > > | > | > * JBoss, Home of Professional Open Source. 3 | > | > < | > http://fisheye.jboss.org/browse/DNA/trunk/dna-graph/src/main/java/org/jbo... | > > | > | > * Copyright 2008, Red Hat Middleware LLC, and individual contributors 4 | > | > < | > http://fisheye.jboss.org/browse/DNA/trunk/dna-graph/src/main/java/org/jbo... | > > | > | > * as indicated by the @author tags. See the copyright.txt file in the 5 | > | > < | > http://fisheye.jboss.org/browse/DNA/trunk/dna-graph/src/main/java/org/jbo... | > > | > | > * distribution for a full listing of individual contributors. | > | > | > | > Yes, we'd have to update the headers. | > | > Best regards, | > | > Randall | > | > | > | > _______________________________________________ | > dna-dev mailing list | > dna-dev(a)lists.jboss.org | > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/dna-dev | > | > | -------------- next part -------------- | An HTML attachment was scrubbed... | URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/dna-dev/attachments/20090114/4b648c37/at... | | ------------------------------ | | _______________________________________________ | dna-dev mailing list | dna-dev(a)lists.jboss.org | https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/dna-dev | | | End of dna-dev Digest, Vol 10, Issue 5 | ************************************** | | Stay connected to the people that matter most with a smarter inbox. Take a look. | _______________________________________________ dna-dev mailing list dna-dev(a)lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/dna-dev Stay connected to the people that matter most with a smarter inbox. Take a look._______________________________________________ dna-dev mailing list dna-dev(a)lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/dna-dev