[Commons-l] Proposal for an allrightsreserved.wikimedia.org website

[bawolff]

> Message: 4
> Date: Wed, 2 Feb 2011 12:08:25 +0100
> From: Petr Kadlec <petr.kadlec at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [Commons-l] Proposal for an
>       allrightsreserved.wikimedia.org website
> To: Wikimedia Commons Discussion List <commons-l at lists.wikimedia.org>
> Message-ID:
>       <AANLkTikSY-eAR4+T8yyopXXBJc3Q3u2uR2P3OG_e5-VY at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
>
> On 1 February 2011 22:27, Blurpeace <blurpeace at gmail.com> wrote:
> > so we can remove
> > two sentences from project policy?
>
> Note that another slight disadvantage of the current state of affairs
> is that sites using InstantCommons (e.g. the OpenStreetMap wiki) are
> currently able to use CopyrightByWikimedia images (well, more than
> just ?able to use?, they can do that inadvertently; they cannot simply
> distinguish the non-free files from the free rest).
>
> -- [[cs:User:Mormegil | Petr Kadlec]]

Whats being proposed here doesn't directly fix that, since if you
setup multiple foreign repositories (at least how the code currently
work), other people using you as a forign repository can get to
foreign files through you. However, it'd probably make the coding
required to exclude such files significantly easier.

Someone else said:
>But. there's no reason why the two should be technically separated. It's
>already been practically divided by categories. It's not considered
>unnecessary faff just by techs; any pragmatic person would agree.

Has any of the ops people actually said this would be annoying or in
anyway difficult to set up. I know things get much more complicated
when you're dealing with 800 wikis, one of which is in the top 6 (or
whatever) sites of the internet, but still - this looks like about 5
extra lines in one config file (assuming meta is used so a new wiki
isn't set up). The only complicated bit might be make global image
links work (but then again, there may be complications i just don't
see).

-bawolff