On Sun, Aug 10, 2008 at 8:41 PM, Bennett Haselton <bennett(a)peacefire.org> wrote:
Is there any reason why they couldn't just say:
"Version 1.3 of the
GFDL is identical to CC-BY-SA"?
That would presumably meet the murky requirement that future versions
of the GFDL have to be "in the same spirit" as the present one.
Although the vast majority of GFDL content would be best served by
being under the CC-SA there are projects that appreciate the software
manual/book specific things about the GFDL and it would be morally
wrong to convert them to the CC-SA at this point in the game.
Which is why a clause is being developed that more or less will apply
specifically to Wikimedia projects.