Dave Page wrote:
>
>
>
>>It's not acceptable that even most trivial patches should lead to the
>>necessity to re-contact the issuer. This could simply paralyze us. In
>>this case, I'd opt to reject any posted patch until the author has
>>expressively granted everything to anybody forever. As soon
>>as a bug is
>>reported, usually its fix is trivial (thus we don't need 3rd party
>>patches) or the posted patch isn't complete and needs rework
>>because it
>>reveals more problems.
>>
>>The idea of contacting people years later is not feasible
>>either, as I
>>have to realize while trying to contact all our translators.
>
>
> Maybe not, but if a court ever tells us to make a reasonable effort then
> at least we can do so.
So you'd really try to contact Ivan if we may use that flag on the
password control? And if we can't contact him we remove it?
IMHO there must be a distinction between non-trivial patches/code
contributions and code snippets used to demonstrate a bug and its fix.
>
> We already put the names in CVS for reporters and coders - I don't see
> the problem in noting them in a consistent way - it's not like it's any
> more work.
Ok so how should we mention bug reporters in CHANGELOG.txt which is the
most important and visible file for users to notice the feedback
appreciation; shouldn't use too much space.
>
>>Certainly, one day in the future usage of the character sequence
>>wxTE_PASSWORD in a file ending with xrc might get patented. But that
>>would be the very moment I'd be burning my computers and
>>start growing
>>sheep and potatoes. Lemon and sugar cane for distilling
>>purposes might
>>be a good idea as well...
>
>
> Now you're just taking the p***. No, it's not patentable, but I can take
> one look at the changelog or CVS log and know that Ivan contributed the
> code, he didn't just report the problem.
I'm having a real hard time to call this a code contribution.
Is an editor, adding a missing colon or article in a text he's
reviewing, a co-author?
Regards,
Andreas
