Re: [Pubrules] Proposed changes regarding references to editors' drafts

On April 4, 2014 at 1:47:45 AM, David Carlisle (davidc@nag.co.uk) wrote:
> On 04/04/2014 04:23, Marcos Caceres wrote:
> > Something I've wanted to do for a while now is drop Editor's
> > altogether and instead point to the contributor statistics for a
> > specification. That gives a more fair view of who did what, doesn't
> > discriminate (if you did something, you are listed. Period.) - and
> > stops people free-riding.
>  
>  
>  
> I think it would be a mistake (and certainly unacceptable in the Math
> WG) to tie the notion of "contributor" to a list which (if I understand
> correctly what you mean by the link to the github page) that is
> mechanically constructed from people who actually edit the file.

Sure, leave it for working groups or whatever to decide. Better, not requiring an editor at all also works. I wouldn't mind not listing myself as an Editor and I only do it because I'm forced to by PubRules. Lots of consortia don't list editors as it's the work of the working group.

Received on Friday, 4 April 2014 23:45:12 UTC