[WmyEE0UsWAwC2i]

This seems like the more ethical approach with regards to giving credit to the original author.

I've seen projects (on GitHub, won't call them out) get bad reputation when the maintainer implements code previously submitted as a PR.

[svnpenn]

> won't call them out

I will. vim/vim has been doing this for years, with Bram basically ignoring the whole point of GitHub, and putting his name on every commit. I love Vim, but that's not acceptable.

[xyzzy_plugh]

Conversely I think that's fine. There's no obligation to accept every PR as-is. Ultimately Bram volunteers to be responsible for supporting the project, so he can do whatever he wants.

I don't understand how this is the whole point of GitHub. I feel like GitHub has exacerbated misguided expectations that every contribution is worthy and that being rejected should feel bad.

[bastardoperator]

The entire point of github is collaboration. If you're going to take others people code, you should at least attribute them. If you look at neovim where I imagine most serious vim users myself included have migrated to, you can see the projects first order of business:

Simplify maintenance and encourage contributions

One project has 700+ contributors, the other is less than 120. So no, it's not looking "fine" from a user perspective.

[usr1106]

At least he should give credit to the original author.

Not aware there would be a standardized header for that, but you can always invent your own ones.

   Original-idea-from: a b <[e-mail]>

[ptx]

There is "Co-authored-by" which is supported on GitHub [1] and seems appropriate if the maintainer is basing the solution on someone's code.

[1] https://github.blog/2018-01-29-commit-together-with-co-autho...