I am going to change the license for text contributions to the wiki.
Currently, text is licensed under the GNU Free Documentation License (FDL). For some reasons (see discussion of http://www.linuxtv.org/pipermail/vdr/2005-February/000072.html), i will change the license to GPL.
All translated articles currently in the wiki will preserve the FDL licence and will get a hint, until they are rewritten from scratch. Only articles i have the (only) copyright on will be relicensed.
Has anyone objections against this intention or the procedure?
With regards, Thomas
On Wednesday 16 February 2005 17:47, Thomas Wehrspann wrote:
I am going to change the license for text contributions to the wiki.
All translated articles currently in the wiki will preserve the FDL licence and will get a hint, until they are rewritten from scratch. Only articles i have the (only) copyright on will be relicensed.
It is done.
On Wednesday 16 February 2005 17:47, Thomas Wehrspann wrote:
Has anyone objections against this intention or the procedure?
On second thoughts i myself think this was a really bad idea (shame on me for this snapshot).
The FDL might not be the best license for documentation, but other wikis (especially VDR Wiki and Wikipedia) are under FDL and sharing content between FDL and GPL is problematic (again: shame on me!).
There was not much editing since the official announcement (and license change), only a really good rewrite of the actuator-plugin article. The rest was typo fixing and spam.
So, now i would vote for switching back to FDL (really the LAST license change). Sorry for any inconvenience.
If there are no argues against it i will change the license back to FDL in a week or so.
apologize Thomas
Thomas Wehrspann wrote:
There was not much editing since the official announcement (and license change), only a really good rewrite of the actuator-plugin article.
I did the rewrite, so feel free to change the license.
Bye
Thomas Wehrspann wrote:
So, now i would vote for switching back to FDL (really the LAST license change). Sorry for any inconvenience.
Why not dual-license as GPL and FDL? If any text added to the wiki is required to be released under GPL *and* FDL, all wiki resources can be used externally as GPL-only and FDL-only as needed.
Cheers,
Udo
On Friday 04 March 2005 19:13, Udo Richter wrote:
Thomas Wehrspann wrote:
So, now i would vote for switching back to FDL (really the LAST license change). Sorry for any inconvenience.
Why not dual-license as GPL and FDL? If any text added to the wiki is required to be released under GPL *and* FDL, all wiki resources can be used externally as GPL-only and FDL-only as needed.
I don't think that this solves the problem. I for myself think GPL is better, but then we cannot translate articles from the german wiki. With dual licensing it is the same except we can use english articles for the german wiki.
I got notice that if i switch the license back to FDL we would loose at least one potential contributer :-(. So leave it at GPL?
Thomas
-
Luca Olivetti -
Thomas Wehrspann -
Udo Richter