How should you attribute an extensions you've made a small change to?

Question

Regarding the previous answer about modifying extensions (linked below):

What if you'd otherwise be able to follow steps one through four to handle most of the changes, but one small thing is preventing that? For instance, there's one inclusion that must be commented out in order for the extension to be compatible with something else, or there's a single bug in the original extension that prevents it from compiling.

If the only thing you change about the whole extension is a bug fix or inclusion, it seems to me that attributing the modified version to a new author as in the example for number 5 above

Version 2 of Greeter by Angela Author begins here.

"Automatically greeting the player when the story begins."

"based on the original extension by Random Q Hacker"

isn't quite fair to the original author, who did 99% of the work.

I suppose it may be different if there are semi-substantial, non-bug-related changes in addition to that single bug or inclusion that requires direct editing? Or in that case would you just fix the extension directly, leave it attributed to the original author, and then make the other, bigger changes in one of the preferred ways (#1-4)?

Either way, I'm curious if the "small edit" aspect affects the example given previously (where, since the extension is modified directly, it has been copied to a new extension, modified, and attributed to the modifying author).

Answer 1

I think this depends on how you intend to use the modified extension.

If you're just going to keep it for yourself then don't bother renaming it.

If you're fixing a bug then don't rename it, but email it to the original author so they can publish it. The Creative Commons licence means that you can also put it online at the Friends of Inform Github repository - sending it to the original author is a courtesy. If they never respond, then after a while you could send it to the Inform 7 extensions manager, explain that the author didn't respond, and they will probably update it on the Inform 7 site too.

Contrary to the answer you linked to, I think that changing the author of an extension should really only be done when you intend to publish an extension that differs considerably from the original.

Answer 2

As an author I would not want anything attributed to me that I haven't actually made. That includes minor direct edits. So in fact to me it is quite more fair to be credited as the original author of a modified extension even when the modification is superficial.

There are also other benefits to creating new versions of modified extensions: otherwise if you update the original or accidentally re-install it, you'll lose any custom modifications. Keeping the unmodified version around will also give you an easily accessible reference point when you forget what exactly it was that you changed. You'll also have the original version for use in other projects that don't need modifications.

Comments

If you're modifying an extension only to include it in your own story/game, then I don't think changing the attribution is needed. The compiler just inserts the extension's code into the story's code and there's really no practical difference between hard editing an extension and modifying it through replacing chapters etc - the only difference is how you go about making the change. And if it's only a small change then unless you see the source code then probably no one will even be able to tell that it was changed. Inform's version command will tell players that the extension was included, which is true. So I don't think there's any real value to changing the author unless you plan to publish it.

---

Keeping track of different versions of the extension is valuable, and I'd recommend using the .materials/Extensions folder for that, whether you change the author or not. :)

---

That is a valid point of view, but I stand by my answer. The question is more of the principle of it rather than partical considerations.