There are good reasons not to require people's "real" name to participate: http://geekfeminism.wikia.com/wiki/Who_is_harmed_by_a_%22Real_Names%22_polic... Simon PJ often advocates to know people's name as part of creating a friendly community. There are good things about this. It also helps exclude people with less privilege, whom we have few enough of already, if it is a policy. I like most things about "Developer's Certificate of Origin", though. -Isaac On 10/30/2014 04:13 AM, Herbert Valerio Riedel wrote:
Hi,
GHC's Git history has (mostly) a good track record of having properly attributed authorship information in the recent past; Some time ago I've even augmented the .mailmap file to fix-up some of the pre-Git meta-data which had mangled author/committer meta-data (try 'git shortlog -sn' if you're curious)
However, I just noticed that
http://git.haskell.org/ghc.git/commitdiff/322810e32cb18d7749e255937437ff2ef9...
landed recently, which did change a significant amount of code, but at the same time the author looks like a pseudonym to me (and apologies if I'm wrong).
Other important projects such as Linux or Samba, just to name two examples, reject contributions w/o a clearly stated origin, and explicitly reject anonymous/pseudonym contributions (as part of their "Developer's Certificate of Origin" policy[1] which involves a bit more than merely stating the real name)
I believe the GHC project should consider setting some reasonable ground-rules for contributions to be on the safe side in order to avoid potential copyright (or similiar) issues in the future, as well as giving confidence to commercial users that precautions are taken to avoid such issues.
Comments?
Cheers, hvr
[1]: See http://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/Document... _______________________________________________ ghc-devs mailing list ghc-devs@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs