The discussion on Wikibooks is not to use License A or License B, but
instead to use License A or License A & B. We do mandate that all
books be released under the GFDL, we are wondering if there is the
possibilities for some books to additionally cross-license with
CC-BY-SA-xx. The ramifications are:
1) if the book is on Wikibooks, all future edits must be
cross-licensed accordingly
2) If the book content is merged in to another book on Wikibooks that
is GFDL-only, it can be taken as GFDL.
3) if an editor wants to use the book under CC-BY-SA-xx only, he would
have to fork the book to another location
In lieu of a project-wide licensing scheme, maybe something like a new
namespace could be created that would exclusively house books that are
cross-licensed? It would be trivial to change the copyright warning on
the edit page to show a different licensing message in different
namespaces.
Maybe we (the royal we, the WMF) need to put some pressure on the FSF
to create a new GFDL version that is not so inhibitive as what we are
currently using. Our copyright notice already states that content is
released under "all future versions of the GFDL", so the transition
would be transparent. Since WMF is one of the biggest users of the
GFDL, i think we could exert that kind of pressure.
--Andrew Whitworth