CHANGELOG details

[Neustradamus]

More details in CHANGELOG.

[selurvedu]

Come on, this is ridiculous.

[Neustradamus]

@selurvedu: Maybe ridiculous for you but the change is the really, I am the author of the solution.

[Neustradamus]

@gkdr: Maybe good to create the 0.7.1 with this PR no?

[selurvedu]

Okay, excuse me if that sounded rude. Let me put that into other words.

While I acknowledge you are the person who initially suggested this change in several XMPP-related projects, including this one, and while I appreciate your inextinguishable persistence in pushing forward changes in the XMPP ecosystem in general, I think it's not completely fair to disregard all other people who contributed to #24 and #27. #27 wouldn't get merged without their involvement, so they deserve to be credited as well.

However, mentioning everyone may be a bit too verbose, and requires separating helpful comments / patch suggestions / etc. from the others, and not all of them have equal value. How does one decide which are more valuable than the others, which deserve to be mentioned and which don't, etc.?

This is overly subjective.

It seems to me that @gkdr tried to be neutral in giving credit, telling "everyone's contribution is appreciated", thus avoiding both that subjectivity and the need to put effort into evaluating the value of each and every contributor.

P.S. Just my 2 cents. I'm not in charge here, and @gkdr may disagree with me (e.g. by agreeing that the change initiator deserves a little more credit) so, @gkdr, feel free to mark this comment as off-topic.

[gkdr]

thanks @selurvedu, that summarizes it quite well.

i'm sorry if you feel wronged, @Neustradamus and everyone else in that discussion. i'm sure you would agree that not changing a number was the main work of the change, but the whole knowledge behind whether it is the right thing to do. and i think you will also have to admit that the most useful information did not come from you. i did in fact think that the easiest method would be to link that issue. look, i just meant to do a nice thing, and neither the changelog or an attribution is actually required. if you don't like it, ok.

i don't mean to be dismissive - if anyone else feels i have not done enough, please speak up.

[Neustradamus]

@gkdr: You must to respect a contributor like all other contributors.

It is not because you have not done a quick merger that you must to ignore the author of the merged PR in CHANGELOG file.
I have signaled you a problem and I have created the PR with the solution, and the patch has been added in some OS before your merger.

I confirm that the code is mine!
An author must be cited like all other PRs.

[gkdr]

i understand you want credit for this change, and i think being the commit author is much better credit than being named informally in the changelog 🙂

[Neustradamus]

@gkdr: Commit and Changelog are important to all contributors, can you reopen my PR and merge it?

The second step:

• Can you add a CONTRIBUTORS file in all your projects too?