Open Stack

On Mon, Nov 11, 2013 at 11:27 AM, Russell Bryant <rbryant at redhat.com> wrote:

> On 11/11/2013 12:09 PM, Anne Gentle wrote:
> > What about something with attribution in the docs for the feature? Can
> > we play around with that a while? Attribution is going to have to be
> > incorporated better into the docs for the CC By licensing anyway. Any
> > thoughts on docs as placement for "This feature brought to you by
> > <insert rewarded upstreamer here>" We need to play with the words more.
> > Sponsored by brings up ickies for me, sounds like it turns others off
> > too. Let's be careful with wording and placement both.
>
> This sounds like it could get really messy.  Once a feature goes in, it
> becomes a collaboration between many people over time.  It sounds like
> it would get into the same situation as our copyright headers in source
> files (wildly incomplete).
>
> This also has a tendency to just recognize feature adds, and not common
> work.  Lack of or minimal contributions to common work by some
> organizations is already a pretty big problem in various parts of
> OpenStack.
>
>
Great point. I'm also trying to point out that common areas like doc could
use the attention and would give attribution. Also trying to focus on
users, and avoid a "how it's made" focus. But clearly ongoing maintenance
is a concern with "sponsored" patches.


> --
> Russell Bryant
>
> _______________________________________________
> OpenStack-TC mailing list
> OpenStack-TC at lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-tc
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/attachments/20131111/ec532223/attachment.html>