[Xmldatadumps-l] [Wikitech-l] Fwd: Old English Wikipedia image dump from 2005

[John Vandenberg]

On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 6:40 AM, Ariel T. Glenn <ariel at wikimedia.org> wrote:
> Στις 12-11-2011, ημέρα Σαβ, και ώρα 00:31 +1100, ο/η John Vandenberg
> έγραψε:
>> On Fri, Nov 11, 2011 at 11:18 PM, emijrp <emijrp at gmail.com> wrote:
>> > Forwarding...
>> >
>> > ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>> > From: emijrp <emijrp at gmail.com>
>> > Date: 2011/11/11
>> > Subject: Old English Wikipedia image dump from 2005
>> > To: wikiteam-discuss at googlegroups.com
>> >
>> >
>> > Hi all;
>> >
>> > I want to share with you this Archive Team link[1]. It is an old English
>> > Wikipedia image dump from 2005. One of the last ones, probably, before
>> > Wikimedia Foundation stopped publishing image dumps. Enjoy.
>> >
>> > Regards,
>> > emijrp
>> >
>> > [1] http://www.archive.org/details/wikimedia-image-dump-2005-11
>>
>> People interested in image dumps may be also interested in my post
>> relating to the GFDL requirements, which I think mean images need to
>> be included in the dumps.
>>
>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Terms_of_use&diff=prev&oldid=3002611
>>
>> excerpt:
>>
>> "..the [GFDL] license requires that someone can download a
>> ''complete'' Transparent copy for one year after the last Opaque copy
>> is distributed. As a result, I believe the BoT needs to ensure that
>> the dumps are available ''and'' that they can be available for one
>> year after WMF turns of the lights on the core servers (it allows
>> 'agents' to provide this service). As Wikipedia contains images, the
>> images are required to be included. .."
>>
>> discussion continues ..
>>
>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Terms_of_use#Right_to_Fork
>>
>
> I would read this as requiring access to the images to remain available,
> not necessarily in dump form.

I dont believe that is the case.  The GFDL, like the GPL, requires
that it is possible to rebuild the product from the distributed
source, minus any seperately distributed dependencies.

It is necessary to provide a simple mechanism for reliably downloading
the used images on each project and incorporating all of the dumps
needed to regenerate a replica of each project.

The 'source' can be broken into chunks, but it would be obviously
contray to the spirit of the license to require that each and every
image needs to be downloaded individually.

_and_ it needs to be possible for any consumer to perform the task of
obtaining the source.  Does the WMF block people who attempt to mirror
the project content one item at a time?  IMO blocking them is very
sane, but if that is the only way to obtain the source then it would
again be breaking the licence.

InstantCommons means that those images dont need to be redistributed
in order for the projects to be compliant with the GFDL.

--
John Vandenberg