A GNU FDL / cc-by-sa dual licensing scheme could be used for Wikinews...
But
this would eliminate the option of re-incorporating third party
improvements
back into Wikinews and would also make it impractical to incorporate
Wikipedia
content into Wikinews for background content (since in both cases the
third
party/Wikipedia users would have to agree to dual-license their work). So
what
we really need is GNU FDL and cc-by-sa compatibility ASAP.
-- mav
One advantage we have with Wikinews is that the number of authors and edit history of a typical Wikinews article is likely to be *much* smaller than a typical Wikipedia article. Perhaps a solution could work where all articles are GFDL (for the sake of allowing a reuser to use a single license), but individual articles can be dual (tri-, quad-, ...) licensed as determined by the initial author.
Alternatively, we could just have some standard for contributors to specify that their content is dual licensed under <<whatever>>, and let reusers sort out the edit history. We could specify that edits marked "minor" are released into the public domain, and if we wanted we could even require anonymous edits to be public domain.
There's a lot we can do with Wikinews that we can't do with Wikipedia, due to the nature of the articles as well as historical problems with Wikipedia. I think we should really think about this before we launch Wikinews. Hopefully a future version of the GFDL will be much more lenient, but we can't rely on that.
Anthony
wikipedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org