Attribution

[dushoff]

I am voting against "Last changed by". I just changed the word "tutorial" to "lab" in one of the labs. Am I now the "last changed by"? Isn't that what github history is for? Can we ditch it?

[carivs]

I think this is more for the sake of the participant than for us. If they see attribution Juliet Pulliam (2012), then they think no one bothered to look at this thing in 14 years! Same for the funder (if anyone ever bothers to check up on us).

[dushoff]

K, that's fair. I'm still not going to update anything I just fiddle -- unless it's been more than a year, I guess.

[dushoff]

Could also just say "last updated" without a name, I guess.

[pearsonca]

I think a better over-arching approach would be for the exercises to be distributed via the course package, and aggregate authorship / vintage up to the package level. That's a much more reasonably citable artifact - I don't see the actual benefit of tracking it at the per script level.

Precise individual credit could still be maintained by consulting the actual github contribution record, but I am skeptical anyone is realistically counting on that resolution for credit.