Credit and Free Software 213
Hans Reiser - you're thinking ReiserFS, and you'd be right - has a proposal to slather Free Software with credits for its authors. Good? Bad? This is something the community has generally moved away from, but maybe Reiser has a good point. Newsforge is part of OSDN.
That would explain it... (Score:3, Informative)
a fairly unpleasant thread [debian.org] started by Mr. Reiser himself.
He has a point, but surely it doesn't hurt to be slightly less aggressive on these matters. Unless he enjoys being credited as an asshole...
No! (Score:3, Informative)
Speaking for myself, I certainly wouldn't want to slap such a clause to anything I wrote. First, I think the egoboo factor is totally overstated. For instance, I wrote a small vocab building app called gretools [sourceforge.net]. I wrote it to scratch a personal itch: to help me with my gre preparation. Ego satisfaction had nothing to do with it. I released it only as an afterthought. Second, what's the point of having J. Random user being being forced to see your name? If you want to build a reputation as a programmer, you would want to build up that reputation with other programmers, which is what you get currenty because your name is in the source. In suspect, most users could consider it as unwanted ads/annoyance. We're trying to get people to use OSS by removing annoyances (like popup blocking), introducing our own forms of annoyance is self defeating. Third, Reiser specifically wants political statements irremovable and visible to users. This is bad. Being free means creating software without trying to impose your idealogy on others. There are practical problems too. You are unnecessarily limiting your user base. If, for instance, your political message included praise for the Falun Gong, it could well lead to any distro that includes your package being banned in the PRC, because you made your statement irremovable. I wonder how many programmers would choose to adopt such a license. Fourth, OSS companies are trying hard to stay afloat and make some money. The better these companies survive, the better your chances of becoming/staying gainfully employed coding Free software. Give them a chance. Don't view them as capitalist evil and impede them from establishing a brand.
That's just my opinion. You are free to pick your license.
my POV (Score:3, Informative)
Personally I feel credit is given to me in various ways.
- Downloads counts stay fairly consistent and gradually seem to be rising.
- Occasional email saying that they like it or even better sometimes coupled witha request for new feature or bug.
- Simply doing a google of my project shows sites all over the place.
I figure people who give me credit on their own free will, by performing their own reviews and such good or bad, that certainly helps me to make better software and that is all i really want to do anyhow. It is diifcult enough to write something unique and useful these days and on top of that stand out in the mix of commerical apps. So people who have contributed to the linux kernal have obivous unspoken credit that they know companies like RedHat are using thier work, likewise with mozilla developers one being funded by AOL to some extent as wellas being used in AOL's software, to me that is credit and prestige that is pretty rare for most of the OSS projects out there.One day I hope to see my stuff being reused elsewhere, and as long as they just say it somewhere that i helped out, I couldn't ask for more.
Re:That would explain it... (Score:3, Informative)
Re:People First (Score:3, Informative)
Engineers and architects off the top of my head: Frank Lloyd Wright, IM Pei, RF Walters (Hoover Dam), Gustave Eiffel, Edward Deming, Filippo di ser Brunelleschi, Alberti...
In mathematics, the most abstract of all studies, you will find almost every major theorem attributed to a mathematician. The same is true in physics, biology, paleontology, etc.
More important than the people who achieve super star status, there has been a long tradition of crediting architects and engineers for designs.
Notice the historical registers for buildings. They often mention the architect. I am not just referring to the historical markers. If you go into the buildings, you will often find a corner stone or plaque commemorating the architects.
Generally architect firms list their partners. This is becoming less and less the case. The engineering firms of yesteryear generally listed their journeymen engineers. You will find traditional engineering firms were named after their engineers.
I have to mention things in historical context. Throughout the 1900s various socialist, prolitarian and new think movements went into an extreme anti-individual movement. This movement labelled the attribution of works to people as egotistical. (especially for middle class occupations like engineering).
Crediting engineers and other workers was considered extraordinarily bourgeoise.
Ayn Rand wrote in reaction to the new think of her day. So she stands as a very good historical reference point in the debate.
Re:Points not to be discounted lightly (Score:1, Informative)
I am a (small) developer. I sprinkle my handle everywhere I go (code I contribute to, not what you thought, silly), in the vain hope it stays there and people will later recognize my work and praise me (or hate me, anyway, recognition is never bad). If I could no longer attach my handle to my work, I would stop publishing my work (albeit not working, I love to code).
Now, curently it is only in the source and in documentation, but it would rock if my name would be be shown to the "average" user....
I work and live for recognition...
Tels (posting AC as always)