Hi Erik
to keep wts
and shared repositories did not mean a bulk
transfer to Commons. But it makes the media files directly
accessible to the wikis.
Just to clarify, what you are proposing is to essentially create
wts.wikivoyage.org and
shared.wikivoyage.org on the WMF side, import all
content, keep them around until all files are transferred, and then shut
them down.
My concerns with this are as follows:
- it significantly increases the complexity of the setup on the wmf side
purely for legacy purposes, beyond the level of technical resource
commitment which we think is reasonable,
I think not a really cause. We made the same at Wikivoyage association.
Of course it is complex but we made it with one person.
- it creates unacceptable legal risks,
Normally the legal responsibility is at last to the author / uploader.
Uploading images at Commons is a risk all the time. You cannot
prevent uploading an image of the Atomium at Brusseles for instance
but it is up to now not free of copyrights.
All, really all 30.000 images at wikivoyage/shared (not at wts) are checked
by myself. It takes six years.
- with images continuing to work, it risks delaying a
resolution of these
issues for a long time.
It will take a long time in any case.
The two scenarios I am prepared to support at this
time are
- Scenario A: We delay the migration to create a more robust time window
for transferring files to Commons,
- Scenario B: We migrate the wikis next week at the risk of starting with
lots of red links that have to be fixed during a cleanup period.
Scenario A is an acceptable choice. So we can start the transfer with the
power of all wikimedians, we can announce this at all project sites.
As a Wikipedian from the 2001 era I am perhaps
unusually comfortable with
the idea of things being fixed over time. ;-) Still, it would be good
to
have a community straw poll or some additional support for the decision
between the two.
You should not make a poll you should start transferring the meta files.
Yours Roland