[documentation] Contributors to docs need more public recognition

[Frederik 'Freso' S. Olesen]

Steve Dondley skrev:
>On Mon, May 26, 2008 at 7:36 AM, Frederik 'Freso' S. Olesen
 ><freso.dk at gmail.com> wrote:
>>Steve Dondley skrev:
>>>On Mon, May 26, 2008 at 1:43 AM, Angela Byron <drupal-docs at webchick.net>
>>>wrote:
>>>>Steve Dondley wrote:
>>>>>What's wrong with being as public as possible with patting people on
>>>>>the back?
>>>>Well, the things that I mentioned in my previous mails that were glossed
>>>>over because of the ownership vs. maintainership clarification:
>>>>
>>>>- A movement toward individual ownership of *handbook pages*, rather
>>>>than community ownership of *the handbook*.
>>>>- Additional responsibility laid on the original author which currently
>>>>doesn't exist.
>>>>- A bulls-eye on the forehead of anyone who contributes documentation,
>>>>for easy target practice from people seeking support.
>>>>- Sticky questions about who "really" owns $page, when this often isn't
>>>>clear or can even possibly be determined.
>>>>- Additional administrative overhead for docs team members who could
>>>>instead just be writing and improving the docs.
>>>I've said repeatedly I'm not attached to that proposal. I really don't
>>>care about it so that effectively kills debate on it, doesn't it? [...]
>>As I read it, all the above concerns apply just as well to your original
>>proposal (and was meant as comments to your original proposal as well, if
>>I'm not much mistaken) as they did/do to you "maintainer proposal". Stop
>>using your dismissal of the "maintainer proposal" as an excuse to easily
>>dismiss these (IMHO) valid points/issues.
>
>I think you are mistaken. To be sure, please state exactly which
>points from the 2nd proposal for maintainers/owners (now withdrawn),
>apply to the first, which is to have a more easily accessible, more
>public list of page contributors.

Wha'? I didn't say any of the points from the 2nd proposals applied to 
your original one - I stated that all of Angie's concerns apply to both! 
And I could point them out one by one, but this would just repeat her 
list. (Okay, perhaps with the exception of "Additional administrative 
overhead", but the ownership issues could get messy as well. I suggest 
you take a look at http://youtube.com/watch?v=ZSFDm3UYkeE which I 
referenced in another, earlier reply.)

>>>>>Do you think giving people more credit will help Drupal find more
>>>>>contributors? Yes or no? Because that's what this is really about.
>>>>The answer is, I don't know. It's certainly not a motivating factor for
>>>>me, personally, nor apparently for the 700+ existing handbook
>>>>contributors who are apparently fine and dandy with the existing level
>>>>of credit they receive.
>>>Well, I can only speculate, but I doubt you would be happy toiling
>>>away on Drupal in perfect obscurity. How would have Lullabot ever
>>>found you? As great as you are, I still think an ego lurks within. :)
>>Even if she wasn't given credit, she was still obviously found. Why was she
>>found? Probably because she was active. She isn't given credit in the code,
>>she isn't given credit in the documentation (well, what I've found). She is
>>given credit in the edit history (CVS messages, revisions) and as a
>>participant of discussions (mailing list, IRC, issue queue) though, just as
>>you are. And this was good enough for them to find her. (Sorry for speaking
>>on your behalf, Angie, but I was already answering his mail, so I couldn't
>>skip this bit. :p)
>
>Right, we agree, credit is good. It's the grease that fuels the open
>source world. You can't have too much of a good thing.

Well, we agree (no comma) credit is good. We don't agree that shoving 
the credits in the face of everyone who looks at things touched by 
anyone is a good idea though. Apart from Angie's objections above, I 
still think "Don’t allow names in source files — this creates 
unnecessary sense of ownership of a piece of code. Your version control 
system should keep track of who worked on it for credit/copyright 
reasons." applies here - "source files" being the documentation pages, 
"version control system" being the revisioning system. Go watch 
http://youtube.com/watch?v=ZSFDm3UYkeE now, if you haven't already. (Or 
Google the title, which should let you read a summary of the talk.)

<zapped part about d.o time estimating, as I have no clue - I just know 
that the d.o webmasters have far enough work on their hands as it is!>

ps. Please trim your replies, removing the bits you aren't replying to.
-- 
Sincerely,
Frederik 'Freso' S. Olesen <http://freso.dk/>

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 194 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
Url : http://lists.drupal.org/pipermail/documentation/attachments/20080526/937b6f11/attachment.pgp