ets
>Martin Pascal
>tel : 02 32 40 23 69, fax : 02 32 61 45 26
>gsm : 06 13 89 77 32
>- Original Message -
>From: "Gregory Maxwell"
>To: "Wikimedia developers"
>Sent: Thursday, September 03, 2009 4:45 PM
>Subject: Re: [Wikitech-l] Any news to upda
Hi Greg,
I guess you've looked into something else.
openZIM was never hosted on SourceForge, exists since Jan 2009 and its
source code has been since then available via our svn on openzim.org (as
well as the documentation of the file format).
I was the one who blamed Linterweb to have used the
: 02 32 40 23 69, fax : 02 32 61 45 26
gsm : 06 13 89 77 32
- Original Message -
From: "Gregory Maxwell"
To: "Wikimedia developers"
Sent: Thursday, September 03, 2009 4:45 PM
Subject: Re: [Wikitech-l] Any news to update static HTML Wikipedia?
> On Thu, Sep 3,
On Thu, Sep 3, 2009 at 4:09 AM, Gerard
Meijssen wrote:
> Hoi,
> I have read your mail and it does not address the point that I am making at
> all. What you write is not relevant as it does not address the central
> issue. The central issue is that you accuse another project of infringement
> on the
Hoi,
I have read your mail and it does not address the point that I am making at
all. What you write is not relevant as it does not address the central
issue. The central issue is that you accuse another project of infringement
on the GPL and you assert that it is proprietary software.
Given that
Hoi,
I already agreed that I haven't seen the code which is available today under
GPL.
We are in touch with Linterweb since more than a year (Emmanuel with Kiwix
even longer) and it took us several months to get useless patches - at this
time Okawix was NOT GPL and NOT available in source code
Hoi,
You make accusations and they fall flat. You say that the Okawix software is
not GPL and it is. You say that the software is proprietary and, because of
a lack of communication with YOUR project you call them proprietary... I
call it preposterous. When they want to fork, they have every right
Hi Manuel,
False accusations and the expression of willingness to cooperate usually do
not go well together, so thank you for setting it right as soon as possible
on this mailing list. Okawix is not violating GPL.
I had a chat with one of their developers yesterday, and from what I hear
from thei
Hoi Gerard,
it is indeed a huge improvement that finally the source code was made
available. This has not yet came to my sight. So GPL violation does not count
here.
Anyway, it took a long time to actually become free. When we were trying to
work with Linterweb it took us months to get some pa
Hoi,
I referred to a place where the code can be found. The code states that it
is GPL code. So what are you saying... That it is not ???
Thanks,
GerardM
2009/9/2 Roan Kattouw
> 2009/9/2 Gerard Meijssen :
> > Hoi,
> > Why do you say that it is proprietary and why do you state that there i
-Oorspronkelijk bericht-
Van: Roan Kattouw
Verzonden: woensdag 2 september 2009 18:10
> Taking code from a GPLed project and putting it in a non-GPLed (or
> non-GPL-compatible) project is a violation of the GPL.
Well, that is stating the obvious. The question is: what makes Okawix
violate
2009/9/2 Gerard Meijssen :
> Hoi,
> Why do you say that it is proprietary and why do you state that there is a
> GPL violation ? Making accusations like this without providing evidence is
> not what I expect.
[snip]
> 2009/9/2 Manuel Schneider
>> I want to add that Okawix uses code from the pre-
Hoi,
Why do you say that it is proprietary and why do you state that there is a
GPL violation ? Making accusations like this without providing evidence is
not what I expect.
When you look at their website you find that the code can be found here ...
http://sourceforge.net/projects/okawix/ so what
I want to add that Okawix uses code from the pre-ZIM GPL'ed ZenoReader and
ZenoWriter which has been developed by the openZIM team before we started
ZIM, but they changed it to be incompatible with Zeno and ZIM.
So Okawix can be regarded to be as proprietary as well as also a GPL
violation.
We
Hoi,
For you information Okawix is localised at translatewiki.net.
Thanks,
GerardM
http://translatewiki.net/wiki/Translating:Okawix
2009/9/2 Manuel Schneider
> Hi Chengbin, hi list,
>
> static.wikimedia.org is currently not being updated and while the dumps
> processing has been assigned t
Am Mittwoch, 2. September 2009 schrieb Chengbin Zheng:
> Well, as I said, Archos devices are not computers. They're merely portable
> video players with an internet browser. That's why I seek the static HTML
> version of Wikipedia.
I see. But maybe it is possible to install a reader or at least th
On Wed, Sep 2, 2009 at 8:45 AM, Manuel Schneider <
manuel.schnei...@wikimedia.ch> wrote:
> Hi Chengbin,
>
> ZIM is an upcoming standard for using HTML contents offline. It is derived
> from the Zeno file format used on the german Wikipedia DVDs since 2006 (ZIM
> =
> Zeno IMproved).
>
> There are c
Hi Chengbin,
ZIM is an upcoming standard for using HTML contents offline. It is derived
from the Zeno file format used on the german Wikipedia DVDs since 2006 (ZIM =
Zeno IMproved).
There are currently several reader applications for it, for instance the
zimreader made by the openZIM project o
On Wed, Sep 2, 2009 at 8:13 AM, Manuel Schneider <
manuel.schnei...@wikimedia.ch> wrote:
> Hi Chengbin, hi list,
>
> static.wikimedia.org is currently not being updated and while the dumps
> processing has been assigned to and completely rewritten by Tomasz Finc
> (developer at WMF), there has not
Hi Chengbin, hi list,
static.wikimedia.org is currently not being updated and while the dumps
processing has been assigned to and completely rewritten by Tomasz Finc
(developer at WMF), there has not been made any assignment concerning HTML
dumps.
We had a Wikipedia Offline meeting at Wikimani
On Tue, Sep 1, 2009 at 9:00 PM, Platonides wrote:
> Chengbin Zheng wrote:
> > I bring this old issue up because I want to know if (or if not) progress
> (or
> > plans) are made to update the static HTML version of Wikipedia.
> > B&H photos just leaked the next generation of Archos portable media
On Tue, Sep 1, 2009 at 9:47 PM, Benjamin Lees wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 1, 2009 at 8:31 PM, Chengbin Zheng wrote:
>>
>> BTW, does anyone know what is the size of the current static HTML English
>> Wikipedia version uncompressed? Thanks.
>
>
> Based on some quick extrapolation (the smaller dumps seem to
On Tue, Sep 1, 2009 at 8:31 PM, Chengbin Zheng wrote:
>
> BTW, does anyone know what is the size of the current static HTML English
> Wikipedia version uncompressed? Thanks.
Based on some quick extrapolation (the smaller dumps seem to be compressed
at ~21-22x), it seems like the dump from a year
Chengbin Zheng wrote:
> I bring this old issue up because I want to know if (or if not) progress (or
> plans) are made to update the static HTML version of Wikipedia.
> B&H photos just leaked the next generation of Archos portable media players.
> Unbelievably, the rumors of a 500GB version is true
I bring this old issue up because I want to know if (or if not) progress (or
plans) are made to update the static HTML version of Wikipedia.
B&H photos just leaked the next generation of Archos portable media players.
Unbelievably, the rumors of a 500GB version is true! This is already
tempting (es
25 matches
Mail list logo
