> The former co-author contributed, so he is still author and probably copyright > holder and has to be listed among the authors, otherwise it would be a CRAN > policy violation ...It's a bit of a philosophical question right now, but at some point in a developing package's life - particularly one that starts small but is subsequently refactored in growth - there may be no code left that was contributed by the original developer. Is there a point at which the original developer should not stay on the author list? S Ellison ******************************************************************* This email and any attachments are confidential. Any use, copying or disclosure other than by the intended recipient is unauthorised. If you have received this message in error, please notify the sender immediately via +44(0)20 8943 7000 or notify postmaster at lgcgroup.com and delete this message and any copies from your computer and network. LGC Limited. Registered in England 2991879. Registered office: Queens Road, Teddington, Middlesex, TW11 0LY, UK
On 06 Oct 2015, at 14:09, S Ellison <S.Ellison at lgcgroup.com> wrote:>> The former co-author contributed, so he is still author and probably copyright >> holder and has to be listed among the authors, otherwise it would be a CRAN >> policy violation ... > > It's a bit of a philosophical question right now, but at some point in a developing package's life - particularly one that starts small but is subsequently refactored in growth - there may be no code left that was contributed by the original developer.That is indeed the philosophical question of the ship of Theseus. Martyn> Is there a point at which the original developer should not stay on the author list? > > S Ellison > > > > ******************************************************************* > This email and any attachments are confidential. Any u...{{dropped:19}}
On Oct 6, 2015, at 7:58 AM, S Ellison <S.Ellison at LGCGroup.com> wrote:>> The former co-author contributed, so he is still author and probably copyright >> holder and has to be listed among the authors, otherwise it would be a CRAN >> policy violation ... > > It's a bit of a philosophical question right now, but at some point in a developing package's life - particularly one that starts small but is subsequently refactored in growth - there may be no code left that was contributed by the original developer. > > Is there a point at which the original developer should not stay on the author list? >CRAN policies only require the presence of copyright holders, so if there is no content left to which the original author has copyright, then s/he doesn't need to be listed. Note that this extends to all the content, not just code. Cheers, S> S Ellison > > > > ******************************************************************* > This email and any attachments are confidential. Any u...{{dropped:14}}
On 06/10/2015 12:58, S Ellison wrote: (quoting without attribution to the author, who would appear to be Uwe Liggges).>> The former co-author contributed, so he is still author and probably copyright >> holder and has to be listed among the authors, otherwise it would be a CRAN >> policy violation ... > > It's a bit of a philosophical question right now, but at some point in a developing package's life - particularly one that starts small but is subsequently refactored in growth - there may be no code left that was contributed by the original developer. > > Is there a point at which the original developer should not stay on the author list?Authorship is not just about code. For example, there are functions in R which have been completely recoded, but the design and documentation remain. Copyright can apply to designs and there is shading between inspiration and infringement. And many of us believe that inspiration should be credited as a moral even if not a legal obligation. As in "George Washington's axe" and similar myths, if all the parts are replaced it remains of the original design. -- Brian D. Ripley, ripley at stats.ox.ac.uk Emeritus Professor of Applied Statistics, University of Oxford 1 South Parks Road, Oxford OX1 3TG, UK
On 6 October 2015 at 13:38, Prof Brian Ripley wrote: | Authorship is not just about code. An fair credit about is the only currency we have in Open Source projects. Dirk -- http://dirk.eddelbuettel.com | @eddelbuettel | edd at debian.org
> > Is there a point at which the original developer should not stay on the author > list? > > Authorship is not just about code. For example, there are functions in R which > have been completely recoded, but the design and documentation remain. > Copyright can apply to designs and there is shading between > inspiration and infringement. And many of us believe that inspiration > should be credited as a moral even if not a legal obligation."Once an author on CRAN, always an author on CRAN"* doesn't sound a bad maxim to work to. *This statement should be cited** as S L R Ellison, C L Dodgson, 'RE: [Rd] authorship and citation'. r-devel mailing list, 2015 with Acknowledgements: B Ripley, R-Core, S Urbanek for helpful remarks **following its own precepts :) ******************************************************************* This email and any attachments are confidential. Any use, copying or disclosure other than by the intended recipient is unauthorised. If you have received this message in error, please notify the sender immediately via +44(0)20 8943 7000 or notify postmaster at lgcgroup.com and delete this message and any copies from your computer and network. LGC Limited. Registered in England 2991879. Registered office: Queens Road, Teddington, Middlesex, TW11 0LY, UK