Amen. I'd contribute to the PHP manual a lot more if I knew that every
contribution meant that I would get listed higher on the list.
I say: start by listing everyone who is on the PHP-DOC team that has had
more than, say, 5 commits (some arbitrarily low number, but more than
one.) List them in order of the number of commits they have had. Then
put the top 5 or 10 on the front page, along with a short list of the
leaders of the PHP-DOC team.
I think this is a great way to encourage participation, and it will make
the manual an even nicer part of PHP. Of course, you would have to watch
out for spurious one-line commits, but I think we're all pretty mature
here.
The bug database did something similar at one stage with bug closers. I
don't think a commit count, however, is an accurate idea of how much a
person contributed, nor is it something I really want to see in the
manual -- it's not really a contest! I think that recognizing people
who need to be recognized (see Goba's original post) is enough. We
don't need to have some sort of 'Top 10 Committers' list, IMHO.
I am also against having a listing based on commit numbers. The bug database also closed the "who closes bugs" list because some guys simply started closing bugs (marking them bogus, won't fix and the like) because they got at the top. It is also very pressing to see that "wow, Hartmut has that high number of commits, I will never go close to him". This list is not about numbers, we can use the numbers to guide us in decisions, but not as an automation machine.
IMHO the contributors listing should not be a mess with names listed below each other, but it should be a grouped list with everyone put at the right place. Those should also be mentioned, who contribute by fixing bugs or omissions, but in the right category.
The authors list should not be automated, it should be based on human decisions IMHO.
Goba