Concern Regarding Authorship Attribution in dtoctl Merge of #33 and #38 #46

Hi @byrnedj,

It's been a while writing you. First, thank you for picking up PR #33 and incorporating the additional fixes, validation, and tests.

However, I'd like to raise a concern about the authorship attribution in the final squash commit at 5dfa009.

I originally proposed, designed, and implemented the core dtoctl functionality, including its CLI interface, environment variable handling, build integration, and documentation. PR #38 incorporated my original three commits, along with subsequent improvements.

While I appreciate those improvements, the final squash merge resulted in you being recorded as the primary Git author, with my contribution acknowledged only through a Co-authored-by trailer as follows.

$ git show 5dfa00928ef37cee72ede32cd596dc812f02bdf8
commit 5dfa00928ef37cee72ede32cd596dc812f02bdf8
Author:     Daniel Byrne <byrnedj12@gmail.com>
AuthorDate: Tue Oct 27 12:19:05 2026 -0400
Commit:     GitHub <noreply@github.com>
CommitDate: Tue Oct 27 12:19:05 2026 -0400

    Add dtoctl, a CLI wrapper for running programs with DTO preloaded (picks up #33) (#38)
        ...
    Signed-off-by: Honggyu Kim <honggyu.kim@sk.com>
    Co-authored-by: Honggyu Kim <honggyu.kim@sk.com>

I understand that this may be an unintended consequence of GitHub's squash merge behavior. Nevertheless, I believe the Git history should accurately reflect the original authorship of the contribution.

My concern goes beyond this particular commit. If contributors find that their original authorship can be lost when their work is subsequently picked up, improved, and merged by maintainers, it could discourage future contributions and make it harder to build a broader contributor community around the project.

For this reason, I'd like to request that we consider correcting the main branch history, ideally by preserving the original commits and subsequent improvements with their respective authors.

I recognize that rewriting published Git history requires careful consideration, but I believe accurate authorship attribution is an important principle worth maintaining in an open-source project.

Thank you for your understanding and consideration.