[crossfire] Attribution for patches

[Alex Schultz]

Mark Wedel wrote:

>  I suppose what they could be wanting is that in the code itself (where the 
>patch/change is located) to have an attribution (fix to prevent crashing here 
>courtesy of schmorp).
>
>  That has never been the practice in crossfire before (there are some places 
>that sort of happens, but more to describe the behavior of the code, and the 
>author of the change put their name in place).
>
>  I personally think the code would become very cluttered with comments if this 
>is done.  And then you get the case that the attribution itself is bigger than 
>the change itself.  Some number of bugs are single line fixes (or a 
>variable/value within the line) - to include attribution for those types of 
>changes seems silly.
>
And if someone does want to look up a particular line or part, the cvs 
logs are where they would go, and that does include proper attribution, 
hence even if someone did want that granularity of attribution, the cvs 
logs do the job well.

Alex Schultz