What is Digg?61 Comments
- freebsdmike, on 05/31/2008, -7/+31A lot of people contribute to open source projects to show future employers that they can indeed program. It also helps set them apart from the other candidates. If you take their names out of the code then they can no longer do this, and takes away their reason to contribute.
- Muero, on 05/31/2008, -1/+25By "baring", do you mean "barring"? They have very different meanings.
- wanderson, on 05/31/2008, -9/+30Nice to see some insight on how to keep people's egos out of open-source projects. It's a good mentality for people to be in: you shouldn't see your contributions to open-source projects as your code, you should see it as part of the project and that part of the project can change.
- mrsteveman1, on 05/31/2008, -5/+19Please stop pretending this is all one big selfless utopia of development, credit should be given to those it is due. You can still give someone credit for their work without leaving them in control of the code itself, have them assign copyright to the project but leave their name in the source for things they wrote.
You are assuming that all open source projects are community projects, some people just want to open their own code to users. And in fact, some developers just want to release their code so users can see what it is doing, but don't want users taking it and doing other things with it. This is obviously not freedom, but it helps in some cases.
If your goal is to protect a project, credit is irrelevant, if there are only a few people who know how to work on the code in the first place it doesn't matter if their names are in the source, if they are hit by a bus you are screwed either way. - inactive, on 05/31/2008, -0/+12I just contribute comments with my name to open source projects. Much easier.
- Paulish, on 05/31/2008, -1/+12Maybe open source projects need a "credits" page. Kinda like the "about" window in a program, but more comprehensive. People work hard and like to be recognized for their achievements. There is absolutely nothing wrong with that IMO. With that said, keep things that don't pertain to the program's source code out of the comments to keep clutter down. I don't need the programmers name to understand source code.
- rideagain, on 06/01/2008, -0/+10The article has a typo that unfortunately led to a wrong summary here.
They want a BIG bus size: they want the project to survive even if a few people leave. That's why they didn't want the guy to put his name on the files he changed, so that others wouldn't be afraid to go and change them -> larger bus size. - pault107, on 05/31/2008, -1/+10*what's.
You're also missing a question mark and, possibly, a brain. - dlsspy, on 05/31/2008, -0/+8This works pretty well in git where committer and author identities can be preserved independently (not to mention the signed-of-by convention used in Linux and the git project itself).
I think it's fine to feel that you own a particular piece of code as long as you don't mind people making it better. Better is sometimes hard to measure, but somebody is going to make the call anyway, whether a name is attached or not. - yodaj007, on 05/31/2008, -2/+10I can see one plus side to the idea of a "small bus factor"... if everyone put their names in the comments, then that will soon become a crap load of names. The names should be put in as part of the commit notes. People still get credit for their work and the code stays clean. Thoughts?
- Phocion55, on 06/01/2008, -0/+6This is a very serious suggestion based on the comments I've seen on your Digg profile.
Find at least ONE article that you can make a positive comment on. You won't be so miserable. - PathDaemon, on 05/31/2008, -0/+5If anyone is at all tempted to click surfslider's link, it ends up here after the redirect spam: http://www.atomfilms.com/film/the_babysitter.jsp
- andy314159pi, on 06/01/2008, -0/+5lol
OSS sucks? All of the OSS that I use seems to have me thinking otherwise. There are some good closed source software programs out there, like MAPLE and many CAD programs, but in general you can do whatever you want to easier and better with OSS. - icedm, on 06/01/2008, -2/+6Go Open souce
I moved to Ubuntu with its latest candidate... dual boot for one game i hardly play, because Ubuntu has plenty of games
bye Microsoft - kelvie, on 05/31/2008, -0/+4I completely agree. The absolute first thing that I loved about git is the committer/author distinction. If I submit a patch to a project that uses SVN and they commit it, it's actually really hard for anyone to know that I was the one that wrote that patch (assuming it isn't in the commit message).
In SVN, when a piece of code is added, the commiter takes credit (or blame :) for it; with git, assuming you've applied the patch correctly the author retains the right to the code, and is easy to track down.
For example, look at this:
http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-contro ...
Shawn Pearce wanted to relicence the Java implementation in Git (to work with Eclipse); to do this, he would need the permission of _every_ author that contributed to it. With this system, he was able to track them all down, and go through with it.
Things like this should _not_ be done in the comments, they should be handled by source control. More modern systems (like Git) recognize this. - dood, on 05/31/2008, -1/+5On the other hand, it is awfully nice to be able to write directly to a person who contributed a piece of code to ask a question. Far too little open source code is documented (without so much as a simple statement of a function or file's purpose! (see Mozilla's source code, or the Linux kernel)).
If the code is well documented, then I could see removing names from the comments. But until the software gets to that point, I think it is totally OK to leave a name and email address comment on each file or function. - Genma, on 06/01/2008, -0/+3not really a typo since they're completely different and opposite, notice it's also in the article. so it seems both the poster and author of this article completely missed the point of the analogy, and basically the entire concept of this ideal.
- inactive, on 05/31/2008, -1/+4the youtube video of their lecture was better. IIRC its somewhere on google code, developer resources.
- GorfTron, on 05/31/2008, -1/+4This is the video of the symposium on the subject. Well worth watching.
http://video.google.com/videosearch?q=poisonous+pe ... - dohpaz, on 05/31/2008, -2/+5This article has some very good insights to apply to any project; open source or otherwise.
Pragmatically speaking, when you contribute code to a project, you are doing so to make the project better. Not just yourself. There is a very huge distinction between being an author of a piece of code, and owning a piece of code. I think people are starting to lose sight of that fact.Removing people's names from the code does not dishonor the hard work that they put in, but rather, it separates out the contribution from the ego. - mikecaines, on 05/31/2008, -0/+3You essentially have this if the source code version control logs are public, and discussions are carried out in a public forum. Mozilla does things this way for the most part.
- dreicher, on 05/31/2008, -4/+6I'm not really feeling the "open" from the article.
- CarzorStelatis, on 06/02/2008, -0/+2How in the name of Jebus is the fact that you've installed Ubuntu relevant to this article?
- AngryChris, on 05/31/2008, -1/+3The requirement that your name be in the code was the major reason the original BSD license was considered non-Free (it's called "the advertising clause"). This article is simply pointing out that what works in business works in open source. It's called "having responsible management."
- theHM, on 06/01/2008, -0/+2FTA: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZSFDm3UYkeE
- CarnivalOfDust, on 06/01/2008, -0/+2Erm, I've never used Pidgin, but my Firefox is open-source. And it pretty much never crashes.
- known, on 06/01/2008, -1/+3Open source promotes Entrepreneurship.
- artofficial, on 05/31/2008, -4/+6God I hate google....
hey wait..who are you what are you doing? what are sticking in my head!! ahhhh
.......
I...Love...Google... - mrBitch, on 06/01/2008, -0/+1Your (excellent) examples of Git's benefits over SVN has made me take another look at how to move existing projects across to Git from SVN...
- yodaj007, on 06/01/2008, -0/+1I'd never heard of Git! Thanks!
- TrendyIdeology, on 05/31/2008, -6/+7There's nothing wrong with recognition, but all that belongs in code are comments.
Your name has no place in the code because it has no bearing on it's functionality. - dohpaz, on 06/01/2008, -0/+1I never said that contributers should not be given credit for their work. I merely stated that I agree that names should not go in the source code. For example, the subversion project has a file in the root directory called COMMITTERS, which holds each person who has contributed to the project, and even states which part of the project that they contributed to; the actual source code has no names in it. My apologies for not being clearer in my OC. :)
- mrsteveman1, on 05/31/2008, -1/+2Linux is a poor example, most open source projects have a few developers at most, and a very small percentage of the code is contributed by random outsiders.
There aren't long lists of name to attribute code to in most cases. - CarzorStelatis, on 06/02/2008, -0/+1If you use barring then it still doesn't make sense, because TFA says that barring (excluding) names from source code maintains a LARGE bus factor.
- SinistralEnigma, on 06/01/2008, -0/+1/agree. It's totally helpful to be able to ask the original author of a piece of code what their thought process was. Particularly for complex or poorly-commented code.
- CarnivalOfDust, on 06/01/2008, -0/+1Yes, but quoted FTA: '[They] believe in open source projects that maintain a large "bus factor."'
The submitter's summary: ''[They] believe in open source projects that maintain a small "bus factor."'
The mistake in the article *was* a typo. Later on it said 'small' when it meant 'large'. Think the submitter changed the wrong one! - iapi, on 06/04/2008, -0/+0I love Open souce
- mrsteveman1, on 05/31/2008, -2/+2And why exactly is this important? Is ego a big problem here?
If you are going to remove financial incentive, ownership of the code, and now bragging rights as reasons to contribute to open source projects, you are going to be left with a few hundred people developing for these projects.
Even the Linux kernel has attribution for patches submitted, are you saying all those people should just sit down, shut up and code for free, with no credit? - Stroggoth, on 05/31/2008, -6/+6"Please stop pretending this is all one big selfless utopia of development, credit should be given to those it is due."
Bravo good sir, F-king yes, digg the man up. It is foolish to think that people have no economic motives, and that making a living doing what you love is somehow bad. Get paid for your programming (in credit, or money) AND enjoy doing it.
Whether you view programming as art or as engineering:
Is it wrong for artists to sell art? No, it has value because it is pleasing.
Is it wrong for engineers to charge for engineering? No, it has value because it is useful. - maninalift, on 06/01/2008, -1/+1Being a part of a community, and an important part of that community, having people recognise your name is an important motivating factor. If people feel anonymous they won't feel valued and important and they won't want to contribute their time and skills without reward. I don't think this is contrary to being idealistic about development, devs believe in what they are doing but want other people to see it too.
- mrsteveman1, on 06/01/2008, -1/+1:D no that's the way to do things, it doesn't have to be IN the source code, but there should be attribution, i mean credit is one of the few things open source developers get back from their effort, aside from the use of others improvements.
- al876ani, on 08/15/2008, -0/+0http://forums.m7taj.com/thread23711.html http://forums.m7taj.com/thread22066.html http://forums.m7taj.com/thread18626.html http://forums.m7taj.com/thread23712.html http://forums.m7taj.com/thread14870.html http://forums.m7taj.com/thread20825.html http://forums.m7taj.com/thread13814.html http://forums.m7taj.com/thread16979.html http://forums.m7taj.com/thread24914.html http://forums.graaam.com/112544.html http://forums.graaam.com/87089.html http://forums.graaam.com/81947.html http://forums.graaam.com/51450.html http://forums.graaam.com/81178.html http://forums.graaam.com/107437.html http://forums.graaam.com/113874.html http://forums.graaam.com/96993.html http://forums.graaam.com/93604.html http://forums.graaam.com/109029.html http://forums.graaam.com/100885.html http://forums.graaam.com/94805.html
- over1, on 09/08/2008, -0/+0http://rmooosh.net/vb/
http://rmooosh.net/vb/f71.html
http://rmooosh.net/vb/f85.html
http://rmooosh.net/vb/f36.html
http://rmooosh.net/vb/f38.html
http://rmooosh.net/vb/f56.html
http://rmooosh.net/vb/f86.html
http://rmooosh.net/vb/f68.html
http://rmooosh.net/vb/f71.html
http://rmooosh.net/vb/f85.html
http://rmooosh.net/vb/f36.html
http://rmooosh.net/vb/f38.html
http://rmooosh.net/vb/f56.html
http://rmooosh.net/vb/f86.html - lolo2007, on 07/26/2008, -0/+0Nice to see some insight on how to keep people's egos out of open-source projects. It's a good mentality for people to be in: you shouldn't see your contributions to open-source projects as your code, you should see it as part of the project and that part of the project can change.
http://game.paramegsoft.com/
http://download.paramegsoft.com/
http://girls.paramegsoft.com/ - netsql, on 05/31/2008, -15/+14That is so nice of Google, these people write the code, and google, in order to help, takes it away from them.
- Shaman760, on 05/31/2008, -3/+2Tell that to Steve Jobs, claiming he created the iPhone.
-
Show 51 - 61 of 61 discussions
The Digg Toolbar for Firefox lets you Digg, submit content, and keep track of Digg even when you're not on the Digg site. Download the official 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is