[wp-trac] [WordPress Trac] #22305: Credits Page Should Include more than 'just' people who commit a patch

[WordPress Trac]

#22305: Credits Page Should Include more than 'just' people who commit a patch
-------------------------+------------------------------
 Reporter:  Ipstenu      |       Owner:
     Type:  enhancement  |      Status:  new
 Priority:  normal       |   Milestone:  Awaiting Review
Component:  Help/About   |     Version:
 Severity:  normal       |  Resolution:
 Keywords:               |
-------------------------+------------------------------

Comment (by helenyhou):

 Replying to [comment:14 brandondove]:
 > If someone writes 400 pages of documentation in one of the handbooks

 I would argue that that is not cycle-related and shouldn't be pigeon-holed
 off that way.

 > writes a field guide post, or leads the development cycle in a non-
 developer role, why wouldn't they be part of that list?

 Who says they wouldn't? I think they would be included (and I'm speaking
 as a person who was involved in the final culling of the selection for
 3.5, just to be clear), but the Recent Rockstars list is quite long enough
 at six, especially given that one should only appear there once. It's good
 to encourage folks to keep working harder to get there, and it would
 similarly be unfair to bump a code contributor off the list just because
 you want to be inclusive without objectively considering the impact of the
 contribution(s).

 I think my point is that we are pointing at an existing page that is
 inherently software- (which in this situation is ever-so-slightly
 different from the project at large) and cycle-oriented and wondering why
 we aren't just shoving in non-cycle-related contributions. I think that's
 an awkward approach - at the very least, consider something else. Wouldn't
 being on the About page on .org be better exposure and more accurate,
 since it's about the project as a whole? What other options are there?
 What's the real problem? Is it one of perception, one of encouragement, or
 both? I don't think anybody would argue against recognition; it's just a
 matter of the why and where would best serve the why.

 > The problem is that we're not giving props to folks who put in tons of
 non-code related hours to further the project.

 As I tried to say above, I don't think this is an accurate assessment at
 all. There are props going to those who do design, UI/UX, wireframes, and
 even idea suggestion. I'm sure it hasn't always been this liberal, but it
 is now, and that's what's important. In fact, I've actually seen
 *negative* reactions from multiple parties for being included in the
 credits list for what they consider to be "insignificant" contributions.
 No contribution is insignificant, whether it's writing docs, helping in
 the forums, or changing one character in a patch. However, the recognition
 for those contributions can be in different ways.

 As an example, in #18141 a patch was provided by the reporter, but never
 used in any way, not even for subsequent patches, but the reporter did get
 props for the initial idea and patch. I personally have some props where
 it's probably not even visible why I would be included, but my time was
 put into serious review/revision/discussion of the final solution whose
 code was written by somebody else. In fact, most of my time spent on the
 WordPress project is not spent writing code at all, but doing all the
 other unglamorous stuff like leading chats, writing meeting summaries,
 gardening tickets, testing patches, breaking things, and yes, writing
 field guides. I was in that Rockstar list because I was participating in
 discussions and writing patches, but I'd say I made it past that that
 point because of everything else I decided to do. Yes, I write code too,
 but implying that people on the credits screen *only* wrote code is
 similarly demeaning.

-- 
Ticket URL: <http://core.trac.wordpress.org/ticket/22305#comment:15>
WordPress Trac <http://core.trac.wordpress.org/>
WordPress blogging software