Hoi,
How do our users have the freedom to choose their own tools ? When they use
MediaWiki, they are supported. MediaWiki is dependent on a stack of
software that is open / free. This stack is essential and, MariaDB is part
of it. Then there is free / open software used in extensions and stuff.
There is software used for the management of our software, the WMF
administration. It can be argued that software used on Labs may qualify but
that is it.
All other software is not supported by the WMF and why should it. "Users"
may choose whatever to produce their own open content but that is far
removed from what we do and might support.
Yes we can produce another list. But what is the point; it does only list
what we could support not what we will support nor does it provide any
entitlement.
Thanks,
GerardM
On 23 September 2014 12:01, Ilario Valdelli <valdelli(a)gmail.com> wrote:
I agree, but the message is that to do open content is
not mandatory to
have open software. Everyone can release open content generated/elaborated
with his own software.
And viceversa, who uses open software can use it also for "close" content.
It's the same distinction that legally exists between software and
content/data.
What I have understood is that there is a larger vision of open knowledge
and a closer one. The same Wikipedia's articles are not clear.
Personally I consider the open knowledge derivative of the open software
and a subset of the open software, but I respect the vision of the other
party.
For this reason I am saying that should be defined who can receive
financial support.
The importance of free software is not excluded (and I said that it's
strategical), but the users have the freedom to choose their own tools and
what can match their knowledge/expertise.
Regards
On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 11:42 AM, Quim Gil <qgil(a)wikimedia.org> wrote:
On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 10:02 AM, Ilario Valdelli
<valdelli(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
> The question is that open software
and open knowledge are not so close
as
open
knowledge and open data and open content, for instance.
Maybe I'm misreading the "not so close" part, but just in case:
Free software is a subset of free knowledge, and a very important one for
Wikimedia since all our content is digital. Free knowledge run by
non-free
software is captive, as many open initiatives
dismissing this point have
learned the hard way. We can't take for granted that free software will
be
always available and maintained either. This is
why we need to take the
collaboration with free software initiatives vital to us as seriously as
the collaboration with other open knowledge initiatives.
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
--
Ilario Valdelli
Wikimedia CH
Verein zur Förderung Freien Wissens
Association pour l’avancement des connaissances libre
Associazione per il sostegno alla conoscenza libera
Switzerland - 8008 Zürich
Wikipedia: Ilario <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Ilario>
Skype: valdelli
Facebook: Ilario Valdelli <https://www.facebook.com/ivaldelli>
Twitter: Ilario Valdelli <https://twitter.com/ilariovaldelli>
Linkedin: Ilario Valdelli <http://www.linkedin.com/profile/view?id=6724469
Tel: +41764821371
http://www.wikimedia.ch
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>