discuss: Al Devs HOWTOs (was Re: Is PHP-HOWTO some kind of joke ?)
Subject:
Re: Al Devs HOWTOs (was Re: Is PHP-HOWTO some kind of joke ?)
From:
Randy Kramer ####@####.####
Date:
11 Nov 2003 19:36:36 -0000
Message-Id: <200311111447.15024.rhkramer@fast.net>
On Tuesday 11 November 2003 01:02 am, David Lawyer wrote:
> I say it's garbage and now think that all Al Dev's HOWTOs need to be
> removed except for cases where he took over someone else's HOWTO. For
> those cases, we might want to retrieve the copy of it before he took
> over maintaining it.
---<snip>---
> If one were to tell him all the things that are wrong, the reviewer
> would essentially become the new author, but Al Dev would get credit for
> a well done document.
I had concerns about that author's C++ documents on the order of 2 1/2 years
ago. I first contacted him with a long list of comments and corrections --
he responded with a minimal set of changes not addressing any of the major
issues. I forget whether I then contacted the LDP to raise the issue, or
whether I contacted the LDP after someone else raised the issue, but I passed
my comments on to Tabatha's predecessor (IIRC). Anyway, I regret that I did
not make a bigger issue of the subject at that time (or followthrough more
forcefully). As a newbie to Linux (especially at the time, but even now
still a newbie), I wasn't too sure of myself, so I didn't.
There was another issue that I tried to imply at the time (I don't think I
explicitly raised it, well come to think of it, I did dance around the issue
a number of times in posts to the list, but still, it was dancing). You
(David) have touched on it above. I strongly suspect that Al Dev took over
someone else's document(s), but, IIRC, there was little or no credit given to
any previous author in the credits.
Aside: My suspicions were aroused because some of the writing was very good
and factual, and then there were the other things that were clearly his
(referring to programs he had written, etc.) that were just wierd. (IIRC, at
the time, part of the C++ document was a rant trying to explain why Java
would be so much better than C++ for any particular project.)
If Al Dev did indeed take over someone else's document(s), even if it was done
in accordance with whatever LDP rules or guidelines exist on the subject, to
have his name appear as the principle (or only) author seems like a terrible
injustice to whoever originated the documents. (Of course, having their name
still associated with the document after Al Dev's changes could be as much or
more of an injustice. ;-)
If Al Dev did take over someone else's document(s) and then applied his name
as principle | primary | only author, is that the way it should have
happened? Should something be done differently in the future?
Randy Kramer
