From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 23428 invoked by alias); 23 Dec 2003 22:21:07 -0000 Mailing-List: contact cygwin-xfree-help@cygwin.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-xfree-owner@cygwin.com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin-xfree@cygwin.com Reply-To: cygwin-xfree@cygwin.com Received: (qmail 23420 invoked from network); 23 Dec 2003 22:21:06 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO sys33.mail.msu.edu) (35.9.75.133) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 23 Dec 2003 22:21:06 -0000 Received: from office.ixn.com ([68.23.74.57] helo=msu.edu) by sys33.mail.msu.edu with asmtp (Exim 4.24 #37) (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) id 1AYutm-0002fs-Gb; Tue, 23 Dec 2003 17:21:06 -0500 Message-ID: <3FE8BFC9.2030801@msu.edu> Date: Tue, 23 Dec 2003 23:48:00 -0000 From: Harold L Hunt II User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.6b) Gecko/20031205 Thunderbird/0.4 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: cygwin-xfree@cygwin.com CC: devel@XFree86.Org Subject: Re: Proper attribution of patches References: <200312222110.hBMLAPRo087003@public.xfree86.org> <3FE888B0.2020503@msu.edu> <20031223204919.GW1925@fairlite.demon.co.uk> <3FE8B5C5.1060106@msu.edu> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus: None found by Clam AV X-SW-Source: 2003-12/txt/msg00358.txt.bz2 List-Id: Thomas Dickey wrote: > On Tue, 23 Dec 2003, Harold L Hunt II wrote: > > >>>>been corrected later, with a follow email from Harold. >>>> >>>>It's a simple change to put that right in the CHANGELOG. So I'll do that. >>> >>> >>>I had that on my next set of commits. >> >>Then why not say so earlier? > > > There was no point in doing so. Sure there was: you would not have exposed yourself as a hypocrite by doing exactly that which you denounce on your home page (pointed out by Daniel Armburst). You lambast those "egotistical plagiarists" that steal credit for patches by not properly attributing them to their authors, yet you did the same thing and threw a tantrum when I pointed it out: http://dickey.his.com/gnu-patches/gnu-patches.html "This is a collection of some of the patches which I have made to GNU programs. I have submitted these patches to the appropriate maintainers, but received no acknowledgment. That is, they were ignored. In a few other cases, I have seen my changes incorporated without credit, but that is another matter. The former (nonexistent or non-responsive maintainers) are preferable to the latter (egotistical plagiarists). [...]" You own self interest would have been the point in coming clean earlier. Harold