| |
Jammer
Registered: Nov 2002
Posts: 1335 |
Credits for 'packer' in productions.
Me and Volcano/EXON discussed briefly this issue and agreed that credits for packing/depacking system, used in production, wouldn't be a bad idea. Akin to loader's case, it's often done by someone else than prod's coder and used in multiple releases. Among pety things like 'testing' or 'storyboard' another little position doesn't seem to be too much. What do you think? |
|
... 20 posts hidden. Click here to view all posts....
|
| |
ThunderBlade
Registered: Jan 2002
Posts: 77 |
The "releases released" section could be the place to use to list those productions where the contributors actually, actively and willingly contributed. :)
The "credits" section then would be for all the rest. Especially for musicians, that would be the place for all the prods listed where someone used their music without them giving permission or being otherwise actively involved.
Just thoughts. |
| |
Dr.j
Registered: Feb 2003
Posts: 277 |
im totally think different from you guyz Jammer/Thunderblad. for ex. i think "Krill" is happy with the credit for his incredible loader. i still don't see any trouble for keep crediting him or other even though they are not involved personally in the project. if today i use Rob Hubbard music
why not to give him the appropriate mention ? there is true
in what Bitbreaker said. if you want to thank your tools or packer or depacker or your glass of beer or your beer you have boozed so nobody really stop you by doing this |
| |
MagerValp
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 1078 |
I can't speak for anyone else, but as someone who has released a couple of tools that occasionally get used, I never expect credits on CSDb when my tools are used. It's better to reserve credits for those who were directly involved during creation.
IMHO, if you want to thank someone, use the greetings part. |
| |
Dr.j
Registered: Feb 2003
Posts: 277 |
@MagerValp: i think the majority of authors (in this case: coders) will be pleased to see their names even 20 yrs after they released the tool/music/loader whatsoever. why shouldn't we actually not thank him? ..maybe is a question of perspective and manners. |
| |
chatGPZ
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 11384 |
try to think it through.... where does it stop? if the guy who coded the packer deserves credit, does the guy who coded the ml-monitor deserve it too? and the guy who coded the graphics program? and then there is someone who coded the kernal routines almost every crack intro is using, what about them?
srsly, its messy enough as it is. i'd really like to be able to find out what releases someone actually actively contributed to by looking at his db entry. i _know_ that hubbard and tel and jch were extremely popular and everyone used their tunes. really. |
| |
Frantic
Registered: Mar 2003
Posts: 1648 |
Yes, it is messy enough as it is. I totally agree (with GPZ). |
| |
Dr.j
Registered: Feb 2003
Posts: 277 |
@Frantic: GRP refereed to Jammer (i believe) , i only refereed to loader credit which is see wise legitimate. i haven't say to give credit to Tool or packer or depacker or Ml-Monitor, on the contrary i think the over usage of unneeded credits isn't so blessed . like Bitbreaker
wrote if you want to give extraordinary credit , so write him on your greetings part |
| |
chatGPZ
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 11384 |
you dont make sense. WHY exactly is the loader more important than the packer or the music routine? |
| |
enthusi
Registered: May 2004
Posts: 677 |
Quote: you dont make sense. WHY exactly is the loader more important than the packer or the music routine?
Wasnt that the original point?
There _is_ a loader credit but no packer credit.
I, too, think its more logical to remove the loader credit rather than adding a new one (and also remove quite some more from the hilarious list). |
| |
chatGPZ
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 11384 |
now if only someone would have the balls to actually do it.... |
| Previous - 1 | 2 | 3 - Next |
