Re: [Axiom-developer] Re: [Axiom-commit] SF.net SVN: axiom: [426] branches/wh-sandbox

[Ralf Hemmecke]

> > I believe the conventional wisdom would suggest that you add your name
> > as co-author as opposed to replacing the existing author, even if you
> > have rewritten it. If this were a separate new program not building on
> > previous ideas, I would that it is OK.
>
> Hmm, I undersand that conventional wisdom is to err on side of giving
> more credit for work than too little credit, but I find this suggestion
> a little extreme.
>
> Gaby, did you look at both programs: the new asq is a _new_ program.
> Re-used from the old program is starting Latex boilerplate, Latex
> footer and AXIOM variable (assignment and a test).  On the level of
> ideas of course I re-used the very idea of having such a program
> and tried to make it compatible (in particular I re-used most of
> the option names).  Also the general approach (using linear search)
> is common.  But that is basically all.
>
> About 70% of the new program is a start of generic S-expression handling
> library which has no couterpart in the old program.  The rest is also
> very different (in particular much simpler) due to use of S-expressions
> and table driven option handling.
>
> I think it is proper to have acknowledgement line like:

>   This program replaces an older one written by Tim Daly.  (*)

> (the exact wording may be different).

If the program is more or less completely new then it is OK if Waldek 
just puts himself as an author. But removing Tim completely is, of 
course, no option.

Waldek, what about including the above information of what you took over 
and what you simplified in addition to the line (*)? You probably also 
took over the interface since otherwise your program cannot simply 
replace Tim's asq.

I think that Tim has already stated it before: respect.

Ralf