[OPEN-ILS-DOCUMENTATION] attribution vote

[Cheryl Gould]

I think ultimately, it will be impossible to give attribution to all
folks who have participated in creating documentation.  I vote for the
attribution statement in the introduction and appendix.  I also think
that if someone feels they have been left out of the attribution
statement, maybe they can speak up and ask to be added to it.  When
you get into the game at this stage, it's pretty hard to figure out
where things originated.

Cheryl Gould

ate: Wed, 11 Aug 2010 14:28:05 -0400 (EDT)
From: Karen Collier <kcollier at kent.lib.md.us>
Subject: Re: [OPEN-ILS-DOCUMENTATION] Documentation updates
To: Documentation discussion for Evergreen software
       <open-ils-documentation at list.georgialibraries.org>
Message-ID: <187101192.51461.1281551285350.JavaMail.root at zimbra>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8

I'm a bit leery of mixing attribution within the main body of the
documentation.  It could get pretty unwieldy if we're putting
attribution statements on every page, and how do you decide which
pages warrant their own attribution statement and which don't?
Particularly after all the "adding, mashing, mixing, remixing,
revising, editing, etc" that Robert refers to it could become a real
mess.  If SITKA and other contributors are amenable, I think it would
be preferable to limit the attribution statements to a statement in
the Introduction
(http://libdog.mohawkcollege.ca/evergreen_documentation/draft/html/pt01.html)
that directs readers to the appendix devoted specifically to
recognizing contributors.  We haven't created that appendix just yet,
but it's probably time.

Thoughts?  Agreement?  Disagreement?

Thanks,
Karen