Brigitte,
To clarify
I understand the forking discussion to mean soley forking the development of the Proofreadpage extension. This would result in two versions of the extension; each maintained by separate developers. The various Wikisource subdomains could each choose which version they wanted to have installed locally.
Birgitte SB
--- On Wed, 11/18/09, Klaus Graf <klausgraf@googlemail.com> wrote:
> From: Klaus Graf <klausgraf@googlemail.com>
> Subject: Re: [Wikisource-l] Proofreading
> To: "discussion list for Wikisource, the free library" <wikisource-l@lists.wikimedia.org>
> Date: Wednesday, November 18, 2009, 11:43 AM
> There are NO considerations in the
> German Wikisource Community to fork
> in another way than technically, only regarding the
> Wikimedia
> Software.
>
> We will definitively remain part of the Wikisource
> branches.
>
> ThomasV has definitvely denied any cooperation with the
> German
> community. When choosen to administrator he had promised to
> make java
> script programming for the German community. In the now
> running
> deadministration process he has said that he is unwillingly
> to do so.
>
> German Wikisource needs a developer with SVN access -
> that's the only
> solution IMHO.
>
> Klaus Graf
>
> 2009/11/18 Jesse (Pathoschild) <pathoschild@gmail.com>:
> > On Mon, Nov 16, 2009 at 10:29 PM, Cecil <cecilatwp@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >> So this patch seemed like a great solution. It
> would not change anything for
> >> any of the other Wikisources (unless they want
> it). But our programmer has
> >> no access to SVN and can't upload the patch
> himself and so we once again
> >> stand in front of a block: ThomasV is not willing
> to accept this patch
> >> (which probably means that even if our programmer
> would be able to update
> >> the code ThomasV would revert the patch).
> >
> > Hello,
> >
> > I think this patch is a good solution. Ideally the
> German community
> > should have a developer of its own, to help
> de-Wikisource in the same
> > way ThomasV helps en-Wikisource. Have you asked
> ThomasV if he would
> > apply (or at least not revert) the patch?
> >
> > Communities should avoid forking when possible,
> because this brings
> > many problems (such as needing to worry about
> stability, hosting, ads,
> > funding, brand recognition, trademarking, etc) while
> removing many
> > advantages (such as benefiting from Wikimedia
> developers, sysadmins,
> > fundraisers, interwiki linking, brand recognition,
> etc). Another
> > consideration is that if the German Wikisource forked,
> it could no
> > longer call itself "Wikisource" since that name is
> owned by the
> > Wikimedia Foundation. The community would also need to
> find its own
> > developers anyway, when those persons could have
> gained SVN access
> > with Wikimedia without all the problems associated
> with forking.
> >
> > --
> > Yours cordially,
> > Jesse Plamondon-Willard (Pathoschild)
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wikisource-l mailing list
> > Wikisource-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikisource-l
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikisource-l mailing list
> Wikisource-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikisource-l
>
_______________________________________________
Wikisource-l mailing list
Wikisource-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikisource-l