GNU bug report logs - #49405
Attribution for printed manual

Previous Next

To add a comment to this bug, you must first unarchive it, by sending
a message to control AT debbugs.gnu.org, with unarchive 49405 in the body.
You can then email your comments to 49405 AT debbugs.gnu.org in the normal way.

Toggle the display of automated, internal messages from the tracker.

Message #3 received at submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Glenn Morris <rgm <at> gnu.org>
To: submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Attribution for printed manual
Date: Sun, 04 Jul 2021 15:58:20 -0400

Package: emacs
Version: 27.1
Severity: wishlist

The printed version of the Emacs manual only lists a single author.
Ref eg book-spine.texi "by", back.texi "About the Author", etc.
The manual is the work of many people (according to the git log, rms has
made one commit to it in the past 12 years).
So I think it would be nice to at least get an "et al." in
book-spine.texi and some mention of the existence of other contributors
in back.texi.

Message #8 received at 49405-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
To: Glenn Morris <rgm <at> gnu.org>
Cc: 49405-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#49405: Attribution for printed manual
Date: Tue, 06 Jul 2021 15:11:45 +0300

> From: Glenn Morris <rgm <at> gnu.org>
> Date: Sun, 04 Jul 2021 15:58:20 -0400
> 
> The printed version of the Emacs manual only lists a single author.
> Ref eg book-spine.texi "by", back.texi "About the Author", etc.
> The manual is the work of many people (according to the git log, rms has
> made one commit to it in the past 12 years).
> So I think it would be nice to at least get an "et al." in
> book-spine.texi and some mention of the existence of other contributors
> in back.texi.

Thanks, fixed.

Message #11 received at 49405-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Christopher Dimech <dimech <at> gmx.com>
To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
Cc: Glenn Morris <rgm <at> gnu.org>, 49405-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: bug#49405: Attribution for printed manual
Date: Tue, 6 Jul 2021 14:33:22 +0200

> Sent: Wednesday, July 07, 2021 at 12:11 AM
> From: "Eli Zaretskii" <eliz <at> gnu.org>
> To: "Glenn Morris" <rgm <at> gnu.org>
> Cc: 49405-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org
> Subject: bug#49405: Attribution for printed manual
>
> > From: Glenn Morris <rgm <at> gnu.org>
> > Date: Sun, 04 Jul 2021 15:58:20 -0400
> >
> > The printed version of the Emacs manual only lists a single author.
> > Ref eg book-spine.texi "by", back.texi "About the Author", etc.
> > The manual is the work of many people (according to the git log, rms has
> > made one commit to it in the past 12 years).
> > So I think it would be nice to at least get an "et al." in
> > book-spine.texi and some mention of the existence of other contributors
> > in back.texi.
>
> Thanks, fixed.

Don't we have history files of what who done what?  I wonder if it makes sense
to have a history for each function, rather than per file, with separate version
number.

Message #14 received at 49405-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
To: Christopher Dimech <dimech <at> gmx.com>
Cc: rgm <at> gnu.org, 49405-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#49405: Attribution for printed manual
Date: Tue, 06 Jul 2021 15:46:45 +0300

> From: Christopher Dimech <dimech <at> gmx.com>
> Cc: Glenn Morris <rgm <at> gnu.org>, 49405-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org
> Date: Tue, 6 Jul 2021 14:33:22 +0200
> 
> Don't we have history files of what who done what?  I wonder if it makes sense
> to have a history for each function, rather than per file, with separate version
> number.

We do have all the history, but it's infeasible to publish it as part
of the Emacs manual book.

Previous Next

GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.