From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Andreas Enge <andreas@enge.fr>
Subject: Re: proposal: add "packagers" field (list of strings (names)) to
	package definition
Date: Wed, 2 Dec 2015 17:50:19 +0100
Message-ID: <20151202165019.GA3683@debian>
References: <565D565C.4030208@gmx.net> <87zixtezjy.fsf@igalia.com>
	<CAJ=RwfbytAavUaizzCzWKqc+8jZ7eejS8odzAo1m6oTqtN6d9A@mail.gmail.com>
	<565F0768.2030209@gmx.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Return-path: <guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:51182)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <andreas@enge.fr>) id 1a4Abq-00028A-5K
	for guix-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 02 Dec 2015 11:50:26 -0500
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <andreas@enge.fr>) id 1a4Abn-0000of-AY
	for guix-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 02 Dec 2015 11:50:26 -0500
Received: from mout.kundenserver.de ([212.227.126.131]:59036)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <andreas@enge.fr>) id 1a4Abn-0000oS-0z
	for guix-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 02 Dec 2015 11:50:23 -0500
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <565F0768.2030209@gmx.net>
List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution."
	<guix-devel.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/options/guix-devel>,
	<mailto:guix-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:guix-devel@gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:guix-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guix-devel>,
	<mailto:guix-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org
Sender: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org
To: Florian Paul Schmidt <mista.tapas@gmx.net>
Cc: guix-devel <guix-devel@gnu.org>

On Wed, Dec 02, 2015 at 03:59:52PM +0100, Florian Paul Schmidt wrote:
> Aww, too bad. I think it's a missed opportunity to be inclusive and
> generous with attribution which might motivate people to contribute.
> Guix is in a unique position with this opportunity.

The problem with attributions is that it is also exclusive of others who
might contribute to the package otherwise. It can create tendencies to
"own" packages, which creates a barrier for others to modify the package;
so inactive maintainers can become a big burden to the progress of the
project as a whole.

On the contrary to your statement, I think that Guix is extraordinarily
inclusive and welcoming for contributions; newcomers may immediately suggest
patches to all existing packages.

Andreas