2009/2/22 Anthony wikimail@inbox.org:
On Sun, Feb 22, 2009 at 1:51 PM, Thomas Dalton thomas.dalton@gmail.comwrote:
2009/2/22 Jussi-Ville Heiskanen cimonavaro@gmail.com:
Thomas Dalton wrote:
As I understand it, the WMF made an agreement with RMS that the projects would be dual licensed and not switched entirely. I think making that agreement was a mistake, but there's not much that can be done about it now. The WMF shouldn't go back on its word.
I would be interested to hear what your source was for such a deal between RMS and the WMF.
http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/foundation-l/2008-November/047013.html
Is this a written agreement? Why isn't it public? Why haven't the reasons for the agreement been made public?
I don't know if it's written down or not, but that email makes it fairly public. From what I can tell, it was just a compromise made during the negotiations. The reasons are fairly obvious - the FSF wants people to still be using their license and the WMF felt the need to compromise, so agreed to it.