Hoi,
Would it be an option to use the GNASH server implementation at the WMF end.
As long as a particular Flash file works, it can be served with a completely
free software stack. It is then for the end-user to choose to use either the
Gnash or the Flash client software..
There are advantages to
On 9/16/10 2:57 PM, Robin Schwab wrote:
That is what I found a bit sad in this discussion: It's based on fear
and loathing instead of user-centered delivery of the best service.
I'm not sure I understand this complaint. Are you suggesting that we
should just accept the pain (as developers) in
On 09/17/2010 12:24 PM, Neil Kandalgaonkar wrote:
Discussions about using closed source tools are not taboo. Not at all, I
think we should continue to review decisions about tools. I myself have
raised questions about (for instance) our decision to never use Flash,
even if we use a 100% free
I agree with you completely, that Flash is useful as a transitional
technology. But I got a very firm no from Danese who is interpreting
what the Board has said in the past.
There was a thread on Wikitech-L about this (you were probably
distracted at the time due to family stuff).
If that is in fact the present board stance it should A) It should be
stated somewhere and B) be lobbied to be changed.
The only statements I have seen from the board had to do with free
formats. What do free formats have to do with targeting propitiatory
applet interpreters?
If Danese is
Hi Kat Walsh.
Would it be possible for the board to state something to the effect that
using open source code to target proprietary software subcomponents of
propitiatory users software platform in order to provide feature parity
with free software experiences is oky?
We of course already do
typo: should be proprietary not propitiatory
___
Commons-l mailing list
Commons-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l
On 15.09.2010 22:49, Daniel Schwen wrote:
krpano is not an option, it is non-free.
A alternative would be panosalado2, but last time I checked it had
numerous problems, such as
Why being so dogmatic? I agree that free software is a must for core
components of our project for strategic
On 16 September 2010 11:19, Robin Schwab cont...@robinschwab.ch wrote:
Why being so dogmatic? I agree that free software is a must for core
components of our project for strategic reasons. However for secondary
components such as an image viewer I see no such strategic reasons.
Because
On 16.09.2010 13:46, David Gerard wrote:
On 16 September 2010 11:19, Robin Schwabcont...@robinschwab.ch wrote:
Why being so dogmatic? I agree that free software is a must for core
components of our project for strategic reasons. However for secondary
components such as an image viewer I see
Robin Schwab wrote:
On 16.09.2010 13:46, David Gerard wrote:
On 16 September 2010 11:19, Robin Schwabcont...@robinschwab.ch wrote:
Why being so dogmatic? I agree that free software is a must for core
components of our project for strategic reasons. However for secondary
components
On 9/16/10 9:49 AM, Robin Schwab wrote:
Those are very weak arguments: social impact... cultural connections...
Maybe. But an all-free-software policy can be defended, even on the
grounds of pure expediency.
I'm a developer and I've worked in situations that were a mix of
proprietary and
On 9/16/10 11:02 AM, Neil Kandalgaonkar wrote:
Also, if we know that all of our software and data can be replicated
without limit
Oh and I forgot a very large benefit: this greatly reduces our exposure
to any lawsuits based on software or patents.
Anyway, I know you are really just advocating
On 16 September 2010 19:02, Neil Kandalgaonkar ne...@wikimedia.org wrote:
On 9/16/10 9:49 AM, Robin Schwab wrote:
Those are very weak arguments: social impact... cultural connections...
Maybe. But an all-free-software policy can be defended, even on the
grounds of pure expediency.
I'm a
On 16 September 2010 22:57, Robin Schwab cont...@robinschwab.ch wrote:
That is what I found a bit sad in this discussion: It's based on fear
and loathing instead of user-centered delivery of the best service. In
this case we told the people sorry, that's impossible because any
proprietary
On 16 September 2010 23:55, John Vandenberg jay...@gmail.com wrote:
The fear and loathing comes from experience.
Lots of effort is 'wasted' on implementing proprietary solutions.
They may give short term advantages in user-experience, however that
user-experience is then tied to the release
16 matches
Mail list logo
