From the original summary:

Moreover, there are some names in the headers, which have not event touched the file, so it's false authorship. Those names has been removed. List of the names to remove has been taken from CVS (http://kmymoney2.cvs.sourceforge.net/) and git logs.

I am extremely concerned by this. If two people worked together on writing/editing some code, and only one of them checked the final copy into cvs/git, then the other name would not show up in the logs, but only in the header. Unless you have better proof they did not contribute, I would not remove names.

Separate question on header style: Is there a suggestion for dealing with a deceased author? (Allan Anderson) There is not much point in listing an email address in this case.

The same probably holds true for Ace Jones. He disappeared without a trace from one day to the next. Some email addresses might even not be valid anymore.

In D12836#261500, @ostroffjh wrote:

From the original summary:

Moreover, there are some names in the headers, which have not event touched the file, so it's false authorship. Those names has been removed. List of the names to remove has been taken from CVS (http://kmymoney2.cvs.sourceforge.net/) and git logs.

I am extremely concerned by this. If two people worked together on writing/editing some code, and only one of them checked the final copy into cvs/git, then the other name would not show up in the logs, but only in the header. Unless you have better proof they did not contribute, I would not remove names.

I had no one in mind particularly. I was more concerned by exact following construct:

Javier Campos Morales <javi_c@users.sourceforge.net>
Felix Rodriguez <frodriguez@users.sourceforge.net>
John C <thetacoturtle@users.sourceforge.net>
Thomas Baumgart <ipwizard@users.sourceforge.net>
Kevin Tambascio <ktambascio@users.sourceforge.net>
Fernando Vilas <fvilas@iname.com>

Those name are like in more than half of the KMyMoney whereas Javier, Felix and Fernando added up together were responsible for only 3,5% percent of code until the end of 2009. Later on, only Thomas was active. John C is nowhere to find (cvs mailing list, cvs stats, cvs logs, git logs) I would rather call them occasional developers and I suspect that granting them responsibility for more than half of the KMM is just not right.

Let's be real, if someone had an account in cvs for commiting code, then he wouldn't ask someone else for commiting it for them. You can see proofs of any work on cvs stats, mailing list and logs, that I linked above.
I see that Ace Jones is there and because of that he shouldn't be removed from any file, he contributed. I do not replace those list, I only remove names that doubtfully contributed to the file.

Jack, do you have someone particular in mind?

Thomas: I consider losing track of someone (simply disappearing from the scene) different from someone dying. However, I agree that is a different issue from what to do with listing email addresses which are not know active, or even known to no longer be valid.

Łukasz: No, I do not have anyone particular in mind either. However, lack of proof that someone did contribute (due to lack of checking into the source repository) is not proof that he did not contribute. Removing someone from the list of authors is essentially making a claim that person did not contribute to that file. I would not object to moving those names to the bottom of the list, with something like "Early contributions by:"

Is there anyone currently around who actually remembers how that early team worked together. I can certainly imagine they agreed on a header to be used for all files, no matter who actually wrote each one. However, removing those headers (or some of the names) from all the files will include removal from the (maybe) one or two files where the person did contribute.

Does anyone know if KDE has any sort of policy or suggested procedure for handling long-missing, deceased, and possibly incorrect author listings? Any thoughts on who to ask?

In D12836#262929, @ostroffjh wrote:

Thomas: I consider losing track of someone (simply disappearing from the scene) different from someone dying. However, I agree that is a different issue from what to do with listing email addresses which are not know active, or even known to no longer be valid.

Łukasz: No, I do not have anyone particular in mind either. However, lack of proof that someone did contribute (due to lack of checking into the source repository) is not proof that he did not contribute. Removing someone from the list of authors is essentially making a claim that person did not contribute to that file. I would not object to moving those names to the bottom of the list, with something like "Early contributions by:"

Have you actually looked at StatsCVS? It logs activity since early 2001 and for people with as small contribution as 125 lines of code. The people I mention are in that statistic. I doubt they have contributed much more than it is stated there. What proof do you need more?

Is there anyone currently around who actually remembers how that early team worked together. I can certainly imagine they agreed on a header to be used for all files, no matter who actually wrote each one. However, removing those headers (or some of the names) from all the files will include removal from the (maybe) one or two files where the person did contribute.

Does anyone know if KDE has any sort of policy or suggested procedure for handling long-missing, deceased, and possibly incorrect author listings? Any thoughts on who to ask?

Please open a separate issue for that. Here I want to tackle format of the header and authorship only.

I'm committing this as there is no real reason why I shouldn't do that. I don't want to be involved in a theoretical discussion about a theoretical author and his theoretical contribution. Everything is logged in git and cvs. You can commit there in somebody's name and not yourself.
Any substantial postal contributions are theoretical. Any collateral/mutual/parallel/team contribution just seem not right from the stand of authorship.

Marking someone "Early contributor" seems not right as well. Why should someone be belittled or enlarged or distinguished in some other way. He contributed no matter when and the memory of his contribution won't be erased.

I feel like I'm not doing anyone any harm here.
I'll be posting more of the parts here, so that other will have time to check if no one is removed unjust in terms of contribution (by pointing me to the right material)