Yea. Forgive me. For some reason I had the wild ass notion that the old articles were GFDL. I really don't know where that came from.
-Jon On Sun, Mar 1, 2009 at 22:18, Ilya Haykinson <[email protected]> wrote: > I agree with Bawolff on this one. The license change is mainly a > problem for GFDL wikis, which suffer from some problems with > attribution and reuse in CC-licensed projects as a result of their > license. We do not have this issue, and don't really need to change. > Even if we wanted to, we would face an uphill battle in making our > license more restrictive retroactively. Unless there's an overriding > reason to do so, I'd elect to retain our more-free license in place. > Goodness knows, we don't need _more_ restrictions on reuse of Wikinews > content ;-) > > -ilya > > On Sun, Mar 1, 2009 at 5:04 PM, bawolff > <[email protected]<bawolff%[email protected]>> > wrote: > > From my understanding, wmf wants to change the lices from gfdl to > > cc-by-sa-(3? not sure on version) which is quite different than cc-by > > (similar to the difference between GPL and BSD from my understanding). > > We also don't really have the ability to arbitrary change license (we > > could say something like from this day forward, everything is blah > > license, but thats messy). > > > > Anyways, i think our license is pretty good. Many people feel that > > modifying wikinews content without allowing redistribution is a > > perfectly good use of our content, which a change in license would > > disallow. > > > > -- > > - bawolff > > > > p.s. everything before sep 05 is PD, not GFDL. We currently have only > > a single gfdl article in all of wikinews (not counting help ns + > > images) > > > > > > > > On Sun, Mar 1, 2009 at 5:47 PM, Jon Davis <[email protected]> wrote: > >> I realize we all _love_ a conversation about changing licenses... but > here I > >> go. > >> > >> The WMF has been disusing the change of WP from GFDL to CC-BY (since > that is > >> now allowed for a short period of time). Since everything newer than > Sept > >> 05 on en.wn is CC-BY-2.5 (and everything older than that is GFDL)... why > >> can't we "upgrade" all the old articles to CC-BY also? I realize we > don't > >> "need" to do it, as the old articles are of little interest to most > people, > >> but we have the opportunity... shouldn't we take it? > >> > >> -Jon > >> [[User:ShakataGaNai]] > >> > >> -- > >> This is a test of the emergency sig system. > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Wikinews-l mailing list > >> [email protected] > >> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikinews-l > >> > >> > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Wikinews-l mailing list > > [email protected] > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikinews-l > > > > _______________________________________________ > Wikinews-l mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikinews-l > -- This is a test of the emergency sig system. Oh, and the following location only accurate +/- 100 miles. So if you're coming to get me, better send a nuke. Sent from: Sunnyvale CA United States.
_______________________________________________ Wikinews-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikinews-l
