Re: in search for XML-RPC developers/maintainers contact

anatoly techtonik wrote: > ||*()*|| [\..konnichi wa, ogenki desu ka, Martin../] > > MJ> On Mon Aug 22, 2005 at 10:2301PM +0200, anatoly techtonik wrote: > >>>P.S. The qustion to PEAR developers. What's the difference of maintainer, >>>author and lead developer? > > > MJ> * Maintainers: All the folks that are officially involved with a package. > MJ> * Lead developers: Subset of the maintainers > MJ> * Author: I don't know where we are using this term. > > >>>Is it reflected in package DTD? > > > MJ> Why don't you look it up yourself? > > If I understand this correctly authors of original code do not get > appreciation of their work on PEAR web-pages if they are not lead > developers. Also docblocks contain only strings @author instead of > @lead or @maintainer, so even if the person didn't written the code > and just incorporates patches (which can be provided, BTW, by other > people in most cases). I.e. docblocks make maintainers and lead > developers the same as authors, but without writing too much. Lead > and maintainer names are on the site, but authors can easily be > forgotten. > Is that ok? Anatoly, @author has no pre-set format. It is perfectly acceptable to do this: /** * * @author Smart Man <smart@example.com> original author * @author Medium Man <who@example.com> package lead */ In addition, the package description should mention the source of derived code (this is often required by license, as you know). Let's put our anger aside and look at this rationally: Please name packages that are violating licenses of derived code, or packages that do not properly credit code authors. These must be handled on a case-by-case basis. Making vague insinuations is best left to the 1950's anti-communist hearings run by Senator Joseph McCarthy. Patches are provided, BTW, in the majority of cases by the lead authors in PEAR. If you don't believe me, take a look at pear-cvs. There are wonderful exceptions such as Alan's recent commit crediting Justin for finding a faulty regex in DB_DataObject. I just don't see the vast egocentric conspiracy you are constantly writing about, and it is starting to get annoying. We all know you have the best of intentions at heart, this is not an issue, but it would be nice to see the anger put aside and in its place a greater spirit of calm collaboration. There will always be snags, but nobody here is "out to get" anyone else. Regards, Greg