User talk:Jasonharper: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
imported>StDoodle Created page with 'Thanks for the help you've been giving lately, it's greatly appreciated! Thought I'd check on something also; is it okay to quote or near-quote revision notes when I don't know …' |
imported>Jasonharper mNo edit summary |
||
| Line 8: | Line 8: | ||
Thanks! --[[User:StDoodle|StDoodle]] 14:54, 5 March 2010 (UTC) | Thanks! --[[User:StDoodle|StDoodle]] 14:54, 5 March 2010 (UTC) | ||
* As the revision notes are frequently the only documentation you're going to have for a new function, certainly they should be fair game for inclusion here. I agree that attribution of such notes would just be clutter. --[[User:Jasonharper|Jasonharper]] 15:21, 5 March 2010 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 15:21, 5 March 2010
Thanks for the help you've been giving lately, it's greatly appreciated!
Thought I'd check on something also; is it okay to quote or near-quote revision notes when I don't know how a function works, as I did with batch_close()? Should I give credit, as I did on that page, or is it implicit that the ultimate source of information may be said logs? Whatever you & V are most comfortable with is fine by me, but if I can save the clutter of including such attributions on a page, it wouldn't hurt.
It would probably also be nice to have a prominently linked-to "Without these mafia devs we wouldn't be here" type of page, I'd think.
Any other thoughts / comments are appreciated.
Thanks! --StDoodle 14:54, 5 March 2010 (UTC)
- As the revision notes are frequently the only documentation you're going to have for a new function, certainly they should be fair game for inclusion here. I agree that attribution of such notes would just be clutter. --Jasonharper 15:21, 5 March 2010 (UTC)