[Foundation-l] Passed resolution (super short update)

[John at Darkstar]

I would very much like to see a license that is better suited to our
actual needs, but I don't think it is very wise to break the rules, even
if everyone agrees that it is a good thing to do.

We do not follow GFDL for the moment, and actually points to an internal
technical feature as an easy way out. How can we ask others to respect
the license when we don't follow it? And even worse, when we try to
persuade FSF to change it so we can break it?

The right thing to do is probably to start a dual licensing scheme,
allow people to dual license old contributions, and then at some point
in the future rewrite the remaining contributions.

GFDL is for all practical purposes one of our main building structures,
do not mess with that. People will argue that there are second agendas,
and you simply do not want that.

John E

Andrew Whitworth skrev:
> On Dec 12, 2007 7:37 PM, John at Darkstar <vacuum at jeb.no> wrote:
>> From http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Resolution:License_update
>>> The Foundation requests that the GNU Free Documentation License be modified in the fashion proposed by the FSF to allow migration by mass collaborative projects to the Creative Commons CC-BY-SA license;
>> Requsts? Is this the actual situation? If so, Foundation dictates the
>> exact wording of GFDL and this is somewhat not what I believed was possible.
> 
> It's just a request. We can request all sorts of things, and if the
> FSF wanted they could laugh in our face and say "hell no". The more
> important part of the resolution is the statement that the WMF, the
> FSF, and CC have been discussing this issue together, so we can all
> assume that this particular request was not made without the proper
> consideration from all parties.
> 
> --Andrew Whitworth
> 
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>