Hi,
On 2023-02-09 10:28:36 +0100, Dag Lem wrote:
> I'll ask again, would the proposed credits be acceptable? In this case,
> the code already existed elsewhere (as in your example for double
> metaphone) as a separate extension. The copyright owner is OK with
> copyright assignment, however I find it quite unreasonable that proper
> credits should not be given.
You don't need to assign copyright, it needs however be licensed under the
terms of the PostgreSQL License.
> Neither commit messages nor release notes
> follow the contributed module, which is in its entirety contributed by
> an external entity.
The problem with adding credits to source files is that it's hard to maintain
them reasonably over time. At what point has a C file been extended
sufficiently to warrant an additional author?
> I'll also point out that in addition to credits in code all over the
> place, PostgreSQL has much more prominent credits in the documentation:
>
> grep -ER "Author" doc/ | grep -v PostgreSQL
FWIW, I'd rather remove them. In several of those the credited author has, by
now, only done a small fraction of the overall work.
They don't make much sense to me - you don't get a permanent mention in other
parts of the documentation either. Many of the binaries outside of contrib/
involved a lot more work by one individual than cases in contrib/. Lots of
backend code has a *lot* of work done by one individual, yet we don't add
authorship notes in relevant sections of the documentation.
Greetings,
Andres Freund