On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 16:34, Mario Behling <mb@mariobehling.de> wrote:
Hi all,

the GNU FDL and CC-By-SA license are already compabtible. When we set
up the wiki, I had a possible conversion in mind. As most of the
content is provided from the core team of LXDE, we could change the
license as well (looking from this point), as we are the original
copyright holders.

Anyway, as far as I can see, there is no urgency changing as the GNU
FDL is compatible with CC-By-SA.

Agreed it seems there is no urgency, now.

Unfortunately it's not that easy to change. See Compatibility with CC-BY-SA on Wikipedia. There is one-way compatibility, from GFDL 1.3, or 1.2 with the "or any later version" declaration, to CC-BY-SA 3.0. (And that is subject to a time limit of the end of July, 2009 (2 days away).

However, PCMan pointed out that GFDL 1.2 (used by the LXDE wiki) does not automatically include an "or any later version" option. I was not aware of this. So, if I understand correctly, to change to either GFDL 1.3 or to CC-BY-SA 3.0 or any other license would require the approval of all contributors

If there is an urgent need to discuss, I suggest we should hold an IRC
meet up about it. Personally, I believe, we can keep it this way. You
can simply take content under CC-By-SA and put it into a GNU FDL

Unfortunately that can't be done. So, if the wiki remains GNU FDL, it will be unable to share in either direction with most wikis and other sites.

Still, sites have changed license before. Wikitravel is in the process now, and this can provide an example of how to do it. (Their site notice currently states Discussion is underway about a potential site-wide License upgrade.) I would recommend doing this, to ensure compatibility with other wikis. The sooner it is started, the less painful it will be, and the less work there will be to find and remove the edits of editors who do not give their approval to the change.

Wikipedia's dual license is probably the best option - so all content would be CC-BY-SA 3.0 and GFDL (unless otherwise marked) but if CC-BY-SA-only content is added in from another souce, then the page becomes CC-BY-SA-only, and it is up to reusers to check this before using as GFDL. (If there is no attribution on the page to a CC-BY-SA site, then it should mean there is no problem, but of course someone may have failed to attribute properly, so we must watch out for copyright/license violations, as usual.)

There are some issues around what is a Debian-approved (DFSG) license for images, which I don't fully understand - these things will need to be decided first.


-- Mario

2009/7/29 魏藥/Medical-Wei <medicalwei@gmail.com>:
> Hash: SHA1
> Hi all,
>  If we want to convert the wiki license, how to let all people in the
> wiki claim their rights?
>  How about holding a petition on the wiki?
> 2009/7/28 Martin Bagge / brother
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
> Comment: Use GnuPG with Firefox : http://getfiregpg.org (Version: 0.7.7)
> iEYEARECAAYFAkpvwAkACgkQHN3lx2LM9DSdtgCfawdaP056I7WaTzUxg++psu8k
> vhoAnjsXlNbHhjdgJ3OBqzchhYEcbVJD
> =H/RM
>> 魏藥/Medical-Wei wrote:
>> > So, the consequence is: there's no legal way unless we try to let most
>> > (or all?) the authors in the wiki agree to convert the license or use
>> > the dual-license. Thus, we can ignore the deadline of converting wiki
>> > license to CC-By-SA 3.0 from GFDL 1.3 - It doesn't apply to us.
>> > Is that right?
>> That's how I have interpreted it yes.
> --
> Medical-Wei/魏藥

Let Crystal Reports handle the reporting - Free Crystal Reports 2008 30-Day
trial. Simplify your report design, integration and deployment - and focus on
what you do best, core application coding. Discover what's new with
Crystal Reports now.  http://p.sf.net/sfu/bobj-july
Lxde-list mailing list

Chris Watkins

Appropedia.org - Sharing knowledge to build rich, sustainable lives.

identi.ca/appropedia / twitter.com/appropedia

I like this: five.sentenc.es