Closed niemela closed 1 month ago
Is this not contributor
?
Is this not
contributor
?
Maybe? contributor
is the most generic of the credit
options, so if we don't add this, than there's probably where it would fall.
What about these two (somewhat) hypothetical situations:
contributor
.contributor
? I would feel a little but iffy in putting my name in if that's all I did?If you think that either of those are not a contributor
then we might need this. Even if both are, it could be useful to know who actually created the package as opposed to the stuff that was packaged.
Sure, I see use for this in credits and I agree that (at least for pass-fail problems) that this is usually just an input validator and done. For scoring problems I do however tend to write partial solutions myself during packaging as they are often not part of the data that can be found.
Sometime the creator of a problem package is neither the
author
nor therights_owner
. It would be good to be able to record who created a package in those cases.There are two obvious choices for how to do this:
packager
tocredits
inproblem.yaml
.packaged_by
at the top level ofproblem.yaml
.I'm leaning towards option 2. I would argue that this information is more like
rights_owner
in that it should not typically be shown with credits, but is useful when reusing and or debugging a problem in the future.Thoughts?