Attribution in RELEASE-NOTES for 1.14

List overview All Threads
Download

newer

older

query.php scheduled to die Monday,...

Linker::doEditSectionLink()...

Simetrical

24 Jul 2008 24 Jul '08

10:14 p.m.

Well, with the release notes freshly trimmed for 1.14, it seems like a good time to bring this up. A while back, someone or other removed references in specific RELEASE-NOTES features to who submitted the patch to fix the feature. Brion reverted that, calling it bad form. The thing is, though, that's exactly the policy we follow for everyone who contributes to the project: there's no mention in the release notes. The only way you could find out who actually develops MediaWiki at present is by hunting through commit logs and trying to match up names with commit aliases somehow. Special:Version is very incomplete, and most of the people listed aren't currently active. A lot of projects mention who contributed to specific versions, and I think it would be perfectly reasonable for us to do the same. I would suggest two sections of contributors: people who contributed code to the specific version, and people who contributed translations. Each one could be ordered alphabetically by last name, or some other criterion if people think of one. (Like putting Brion and Tim at top, and maybe putting regular committers above one-time patch submitters.) If someone contributes a patch via Bugzilla or whatever, they get added to the list like anyone who personally committed code, not inline with the feature they added. What does everyone think?

Show replies by date

Chad

25 Jul 25 Jul

12:04 a.m.

On Thu, Jul 24, 2008 at 6:14 PM, Simetrical <Simetrical+wikilist(a)gmail.com> wrote:

...

I'm all for it. I think it's a great way to give credit to those who help out in various ways (contributing patches, translations) but don't necessarily get a share of the spotlight. That's not to say that it should be seen as some sort of badge to wear, just a matter of giving credit where credit is due. I'd be more than willing to add "Patch by so-and-so" or whatever the determined format is. -Chad

Gerard Meijssen

12:09 a.m.

Hoi, Remember to attribute the many people who contribute through the localisation effort of Betawiki... *This *is what makes MediaWiki usable for more then half our public. Thanks, GerardM On Fri, Jul 25, 2008 at 2:04 AM, Chad <innocentkiller(a)gmail.com> wrote:

...

On Thu, Jul 24, 2008 at 6:14 PM, Simetrical <Simetrical+wikilist(a)gmail.com <Simetrical%2Bwikilist(a)gmail.com>> wrote:

MinuteElectron

12:13 a.m.

Gerard Meijssen wrote:

...

Hoi, Remember to attribute the many people who contribute through the localisation effort of Betawiki... *This *is what makes MediaWiki usable for more then half our public. Thanks, GerardM

Chad

5:59 a.m.

On Thu, Jul 24, 2008 at 8:13 PM, MinuteElectron <minuteelectron(a)googlemail.com> wrote:

...

Gerard Meijssen wrote:

Hoi, Remember to attribute the many people who contribute through the localisation effort of Betawiki... *This *is what makes MediaWiki usable for more then half our public. Thanks, GerardM

This already happens, but there was no suggestion to remove the names of translators, or not to put them in any attribution file. I'm sure that siebrand or Nikerabbit could supply a list of names and regularly update such a file (perhaps more easily if translators were split into a different list though). MinuteElectron. _______________________________________________ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l

I've been bold and added a CREDITS file to the current trunk (r38020). Listed alphabetically by first name (or username, if I didn't know the real name) are Developers (those with commit) Patch submitters (people who don't commit but help on Bugzilla/IRC/etc), and translators. I suppose it's simple enough to update the list with new names as they occur. Thoughts on it? Change of style? -Chad

Niklas Laxström

12:17 p.m.

On 25/07/2008, MinuteElectron <minuteelectron(a)googlemail.com> wrote:

...

I'm sure that siebrand or Nikerabbit could supply a list of names and regularly update such a file (perhaps more easily if translators were split into a different list though).

It's not that straightforward. Which translators to include? - core and extensions or only core - only translators after some specific date - everyone who has ever changed a message that is still in use - only the people who 'own' a latest edit in any of the messages (currently in use with no-remove policy) - people who do maintenance work for all languages Will the file be cleared for every release? Which format to use? - real name (not currently available for use in Betawiki) - user name (currently in use) - email address - year Will the credits in message files stay as-is? These are the things that I can quickly think of. I'd like to note, again, we are quite busy. I don't want to sound desperate, but it shows up already. -- Niklas Laxström

Chad

4 p.m.

On Fri, Jul 25, 2008 at 8:17 AM, Niklas Laxström <niklas.laxstrom(a)gmail.com> wrote:

...

On 25/07/2008, MinuteElectron <minuteelectron(a)googlemail.com> wrote:

I'm sure that siebrand or Nikerabbit could supply a list of names and regularly update such a file (perhaps more easily if translators were split into a different list though).

I would say only core. As the CREDITS is aimed only at core software, the associated "Translators" list should be on the same core. If various extensions want to give credit (I think a few other extensions have a CREDITS-type file?), then they can do it themselves. I would say add all the usernames who've contributed to messages within a specific release.

...

Will the file be cleared for every release?

When making CREDITS, I specified at the top that it's for 1.14. I figured that since the pool of developers changes over time (people come and go, it's natural), it's best to list who contributed to _that_ version. Once branched, the CREDITS file will remain the same for that version, and a new one will be started.

...

Which format to use? - real name (not currently available for use in Betawiki) - user name (currently in use) - email address - year

I listed alphabetically by first name or username, whichever is known. I'm open to other ideas, if anyone has them.

...

Will the credits in message files stay as-is?

No reason to tweak those, IMO.

...

These are the things that I can quickly think of. I'd like to note, again, we are quite busy. I don't want to sound desperate, but it shows up already. -- Niklas Laxström _______________________________________________ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l

MinuteElectron

4:05 p.m.

Chad wrote:

...

On Fri, Jul 25, 2008 at 8:17 AM, Niklas Laxström <niklas.laxstrom(a)gmail.com> wrote:

Will the file be cleared for every release?

All users who contributed to a previous version will have effectively contributed to any version after that, since there contributions will still be in the code base. It seams unfair to remove people simply because they did not contribute specifically to the very latest version, even if there changes are still in use and enjoyed by the users. MinuteElectron.

Thomas Dalton

4:15 p.m.

...

If we list everyone, though, the list will get prohibitively long. Major contributors to earlier version could be listed, though.

MinuteElectron

4:25 p.m.

Thomas Dalton wrote:

...

If we list everyone, though, the list will get prohibitively long.

I'm not so sure it would get that long, the CREDITS file is split into several sections; developers will generally stay the same, only a few being added occasionally, and there aren't that many patch contributors. MinuteElectron.

Brion Vibber

27 Jul 27 Jul

10:16 p.m.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Thomas Dalton wrote: |> All users who contributed to a previous version will have effectively |> contributed to any version after that, since there contributions will |> still be in the code base. It seams unfair to remove people simply |> because they did not contribute specifically to the very latest version, |> even if there changes are still in use and enjoyed by the users. | | If we list everyone, though, the list will get prohibitively long. | Major contributors to earlier version could be listed, though. What's prohibitive about a long list of names in a text file? - -- brion

...PGP SIGNATURE...

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.8 (Darwin) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iEYEARECAAYFAkiM87AACgkQwRnhpk1wk44mnQCfZKRV+L++GkJS7ipbIBvyLNu2 Eb8AnRKsltLNCLpvI8k69p4LlKoDhckG =KIy+ -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Simetrical

10:22 p.m.

On Sun, Jul 27, 2008 at 6:16 PM, Brion Vibber <brion(a)wikimedia.org> wrote:

...

What's prohibitive about a long list of names in a text file?

For one thing, it doesn't distinguish between who's being working on the latest releases and who hasn't committed anything since 2003, which can be a useful thing to know.

Simetrical

10:22 p.m.

On Sun, Jul 27, 2008 at 6:22 PM, Simetrical <Simetrical+wikilist(a)gmail.com> wrote:

...

On Sun, Jul 27, 2008 at 6:16 PM, Brion Vibber <brion(a)wikimedia.org> wrote:

What's prohibitive about a long list of names in a text file?

For one thing, it doesn't distinguish between who's being working on the latest releases and who hasn't committed anything since 2003, which can be a useful thing to know.

Although actually, this doesn't precisely address your point, it's still something I think is worthwhile to consider in general here.

zh509＠york.ac.uk

29 Jul 29 Jul

7:18 p.m.

New subject: can't download!

hi, there, I can't download dump from http://download.wikimedia.org/enwiki/. everytime i tried to download directly, system said "download completed with 693 bytes in 1 second", the file i want to is more than 5gb! Anyone can help me? thanks! zeyi

Platonides

9:21 p.m.

New subject: can't download!

zh509 wrote:

...

I downloaded today many GB from download.wikimedia.org without problems (but waiting quite a lot longer than 1 sec :) ).

Brion Vibber

28 Jul 28 Jul

6:13 p.m.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Simetrical wrote:

...

On Sun, Jul 27, 2008 at 6:16 PM, Brion Vibber <brion(a)wikimedia.org> wrote:

What's prohibitive about a long list of names in a text file?

For one thing, it doesn't distinguish between who's being working on the latest releases and who hasn't committed anything since 2003, which can be a useful thing to know.

Well, you could extract such a list from RELEASE-NOTES. :) It still gives warm, fuzzy feelings to have everyone on an equal footing in a CREDITS file. I guess that's the open-source commie hippie in me. - -- brion

...PGP SIGNATURE...

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.8 (Darwin) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iEYEARECAAYFAkiODFMACgkQwRnhpk1wk45B4QCgntAx3MPQRiaiv8FdF2ooNXi3 MGoAnix9UM5wBX7Py+vBsMxrcAugyZXE =aJ9y -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Simetrical

6:21 p.m.

On Mon, Jul 28, 2008 at 2:13 PM, Brion Vibber <brion(a)wikimedia.org> wrote:

...

Well, you could extract such a list from RELEASE-NOTES. :)

. . . how? That doesn't say anywhere who contributed to the version. In fact, my initial proposal was nothing more than that we should *add* such a list to RELEASE-NOTES.

Brion Vibber

6:42 p.m.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Simetrical wrote:

...

On Mon, Jul 28, 2008 at 2:13 PM, Brion Vibber <brion(a)wikimedia.org> wrote:

Well, you could extract such a list from RELEASE-NOTES. :)

. . . how? That doesn't say anywhere who contributed to the version.

It should.

...

In fact, my initial proposal was nothing more than that we should *add* such a list to RELEASE-NOTES.

Yep! - -- brion

...PGP SIGNATURE...

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.8 (Darwin) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iEYEARECAAYFAkiOEwgACgkQwRnhpk1wk441wACfXnxkLSCW9ILtJ+DWQGvICzuF G3UAn1aYc5Cqxmfa0/gD+hlTNWKH6k/Y =wbTu -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Simetrical

6:59 p.m.

On Mon, Jul 28, 2008 at 2:42 PM, Brion Vibber <brion(a)wikimedia.org> wrote:

...

Simetrical wrote:

. . . how? That doesn't say anywhere who contributed to the version.

It should.

So we're doing that too?

Brion Vibber

7:15 p.m.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Simetrical wrote:

...

On Mon, Jul 28, 2008 at 2:42 PM, Brion Vibber <brion(a)wikimedia.org> wrote:

Simetrical wrote:

. . . how? That doesn't say anywhere who contributed to the version.

It should.

So we're doing that too?

We should be, as it's a good suggestion. - -- brion

...PGP SIGNATURE...

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.8 (Darwin) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iEYEARECAAYFAkiOGuYACgkQwRnhpk1wk47ChwCePOTpfpc2kSCaXsC85s6oe9Xv bpYAniHtH0YlMAWFVK8JKSghYriapRmp =EUfu -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Magnus Manske

29 Jul 29 Jul

6:51 a.m.

On Mon, Jul 28, 2008 at 8:15 PM, Brion Vibber <brion(a)wikimedia.org> wrote:

...

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Simetrical wrote:

On Mon, Jul 28, 2008 at 2:42 PM, Brion Vibber <brion(a)wikimedia.org> wrote:

Simetrical wrote:

. . . how? That doesn't say anywhere who contributed to the version.

It should.

So we're doing that too?

We should be, as it's a good suggestion.

Couldn't we get that list from SVN changes to RELEASE-NOTES? That would give an additional incentive to update the thing when you change something noteworthy. Magnus

MinuteElectron

8:19 a.m.

Magnus Manske wrote:

...

Couldn't we get that list from SVN changes to RELEASE-NOTES? That would give an additional incentive to update the thing when you change something noteworthy.

That would not include patch authors, or extra information such as real names. MinuteElectron.

Gerard Meijssen

28 Jul 28 Jul

8:05 a.m.

Hoi, We are talking about a text file that only lists names .... My question to you, how much does it cost in size to include 1000 people? How much does it cost to reduce this list in time and effort to bring it down by a few hundred.. Where is the profit in doing this? Are you volunteering to do this work that you feel needs doing ?? Thanks, Gerard On Fri, Jul 25, 2008 at 6:15 PM, Thomas Dalton <thomas.dalton(a)gmail.com>wrote;wrote:

...

If we list everyone, though, the list will get prohibitively long. Major contributors to earlier version could be listed, though. _______________________________________________ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l

Simetrical

25 Jul 25 Jul

4:15 p.m.

On Fri, Jul 25, 2008 at 12:00 PM, Chad <innocentkiller(a)gmail.com> wrote:

...

This is why I suggested that we use RELEASE-NOTES: old RELEASE-NOTES are already copied into HISTORY. That way, all previous developers (who did contribute to the new version too, via the old one) will be credited as well.

MinuteElectron

12:11 a.m.

Simetrical wrote:

...

Perhaps an AUTHORS or CONTRIBUTORS text file would be nice, I've seen it done in various other pieces of open source software. Listing all the names there would be good, and probably help with regards to attribution and GPL compliance. Having it in a separate file in a common format (as opposed to strewn about RELEASE-NOTES) would mean that it could be parsed if someone wanted to do so (right now it is difficult to get a comprehensive list of contributors without going through each of the files and scanning for @author tags - even that isn't complete). It could also remove duplication. MinuteElectron.

5774

days inactive

5779

days old

wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org

Manage subscription

24 comments

10 participants

tags (0)

participants (10)

Brion Vibber
Chad
Gerard Meijssen
Magnus Manske
MinuteElectron
Niklas Laxström
Platonides
Simetrical
Thomas Dalton
zh509＠york.ac.uk