On 04/12/2007, Anthony wikimail@inbox.org wrote:
On Dec 4, 2007 6:53 PM, Robert Rohde rarohde@gmail.com wrote:
As the WMF provides databases that do not contain the relevant metadata, I would certainly say that the WMF's actions amount to a de facto claim that article content can be distributed without history listings. If that is not the WMF's intent, then they ought to at least make clearer to reusers that they will need more than just the articles dump and provide mirror sites with a way to obtain and use history information without loading every historical version of every article. (Not least because there are no complete and working history dumps of the largest wikis).
FWIW, the stub-history dumps provide all the authorship information needed to be GFDL compliant. I agree with your sentiment, though.
What sentiment are you agreeing with? His email is based on a false premise, it's meaningless.