🤝 How might we best attribute fellow authors, incentivizing collaboration?

[JFWooten4]

While my original idea was to treat Git blame and commit logs as the source of communal activity, I realize now that it might not be super apparent what's happening here. Also, we've floated the idea of mass comments before, as customary for form-based petitions. However, I do not see any evidence that staff take mass comments more seriously than singular definitive perspectives.

Accordingly, I think we should amend the present heading metadata info to include a contributors line item.¹ Anyone who commits to the file ought to include their name in the line, and thus they will additionally appear on the signature page. Meaningfully, this is distinct from just chatting through the Issues or PR review.

I explored this with @tehchives as the other member who contributed directly through PR to TAR1. However, it was just something a little out of reasonability given the balance of work according to their perspective. Notwithstanding, I think we can put future work out more akin to the BT Response 5 we just completed, which means credits.

Footnotes

1. Personally, I'd prefer this shows up above the originator, since it ought be the teamwork which really makes a letter sparkle. ↩