Wikiversity:IRC meeting:New licence for Wikiversity Beta/log
<assassingr> Shall we start?
<Juandev> I think we can
change the licence before the Foundation or to make easier the changement for the Foundation ?
[edit]<dcrochet> so, my 1° question : Is about to change the licence before the Foundation or to make easier the changement for the Foundation ?
<dcrochet> because in long or short time, all project will passe to CC-by-sa
<assassingr> That is sure, right?
<Juandev> well, thats was my missunderstanding. I had no idea firstly that foundation is planning this in early future
<atglenn> I don't think that this is a sure thing at all.
[2008-03-01 14:19:43] [INFO] Now logging to <file:#wikiversity.2008-03-01.log>.
[2008-03-01 14:20:08] <mikeu> ok, the log has started
[2008-03-01 14:20:22] <Juandev> nice
[2008-03-01 14:20:28] <assassingr> Have someone actually read sth about that?
[2008-03-01 14:20:36] <dcrochet> but J Wales want to change the future project of GFDL and CC to pass-cross between
[2008-03-01 14:20:38] <assassingr> *hs
[2008-03-01 14:20:56] <Juandev> assassingr: me not
both licenses and about discussions on foundation-l
[edit][2008-03-01 14:21:03] <atglenn> I did as much research as I could about both licenses and about discussions on foundation-l
[2008-03-01 14:21:27] <atglenn> (and tried to get as much nfo as I could about what the FSF and CC are doing, but that was harder. )
[2008-03-01 14:21:37] <assassingr> And what were the fruits of your research?
[2008-03-01 14:21:47] <atglenn> an 8 page paper :-/
[2008-03-01 14:21:53] <Juandev> goosch
[2008-03-01 14:22:15] <Juandev> so let tell us something in summary
[2008-03-01 14:22:17] <mikeu> where is this paper?
[2008-03-01 14:22:33] <atglenn> in someone's mailbox waiting for corrections/additions
[2008-03-01 14:23:07] <mikeu> there are also comments at http://beta.wikiversity.org/wiki/Wikiversity_talk:IRC_meeting:New_licence_for_Wikiversity_Beta
[2008-03-01 14:23:19] <mikeu> and at http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/User:JWSchmidt/Blog/1_December_2007
[2008-03-01 14:23:27] <atglenn> my best guess is that the next revision of the GFDL and the next revision of CC-BY-SA will be very close to each other
[2008-03-01 14:23:52] <mikeu> it does sound like there is work to get the two licenses close together
[2008-03-01 14:24:24] <Juandev> atglenn: and it means, that there will be a possibility to swich next GFDL version to CC-BY-SA license
[2008-03-01 14:24:56] <dcrochet> at the starting of wikipédia, CC-licence do not exist, so, only GFDL for free licence, but, since, CC-licence appeared
[2008-03-01 14:25:23] <Juandev> the question is, how much time it will take and if it is legall (who someone pointed via mailing list)?
[2008-03-01 14:25:50] <Juandev> dcrochet: yes, thats right
[2008-03-01 14:26:02] <mikeu> is there such a hurry to change the license of beta before wikimedia makes the change for all projects?
[2008-03-01 14:26:05] <dcrochet> GFDL is more ?contraigant? than CC-by-sa because, in GFDL, all the term of the licence must be print. How make it with a printing-tee shirt which use a GFDL image ?!?
[2008-03-01 14:26:32] <Juandev> mikeu: I thinky if it will be within month there is no hurry
[2008-03-01 14:27:04] <mikeu> if it takes 2 or 3 months - is that a big concern?
[2008-03-01 14:27:17] <Juandev> dcrochet: lol one site logo, other site full text of GFDL license
[2008-03-01 14:27:19] <assassingr> But we are not sure that the WMF is indeed going to change the licenses. Personally, I've only heard rumours
[2008-03-01 14:27:46] <mikeu> if we make a major change in license now, will we need to then make a second major change when WMF adopts a new license?
[2008-03-01 14:27:49] <dcrochet> I read the foundation malllinf list to search the mail
[2008-03-01 14:28:03] <Juandev> assassingr: well, if they announce it, I believe they do it
[2008-03-01 14:28:32] <dcrochet> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/htdig/foundation-l/2007-September/032813.html
[2008-03-01 14:28:33] <assassingr> Was that in a mail from the mailing list?
[2008-03-01 14:28:34] <Juandev> mikeu: I dont think so, well stay with our license
[2008-03-01 14:29:02] <assassingr> OK then
estimations when there will be change of licence ?
[edit][2008-03-01 14:29:18] <HOTR> mikeu: This is WMF stuff. 3 months is an extremely optimistic outlook
[2008-03-01 14:29:49] <mikeu> hotr it is better to do this the right way than to do it quickly
[2008-03-01 14:29:56] <Juandev> even it doesnt depend on WMF, but FSF
[2008-03-01 14:30:02] <HOTR> assassingr: There is work being done to make sure that future CC and GFDL licences are more directly compatible.
[2008-03-01 14:30:37] <HOTR> This is real work, not rumours. Now, when and whether it bears a compatible licence change, that is to be seen
[2008-03-01 14:30:56] <HOTR> Juandev: WMF have the FSF involved.
[2008-03-01 14:31:00] <dcrochet> the resolutioon of the WMF : http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Resolution:License_update
[2008-03-01 14:31:41] <HOTR> mikeu: I agree, we shouldn't be hasty. But if it's 3 more years, we should look into things.
[2008-03-01 14:32:59] <Juandev> well, to swich now a licence it can have advantages and also disadvantages
[2008-03-01 14:33:15] <mikeu> if it looks like it will take 3 years than perhaps we should join the WMF effort and push it along
[2008-03-01 14:33:28] <atglenn> ( sorry about that... .I had to deal with household matters that could not be put off. )
[2008-03-01 14:33:36] <Juandev> major desadvantage would be incompatability with other wikimedia projects and problems trasporting data e.g. from wikibooks
[2008-03-01 14:34:16] <mikeu> we also should consult a lawyer to find out if there any issues that we have not thought of
[2008-03-01 14:34:34] <assassingr> From my point of view, since the WMF is going to change licenses, we should help that because the more the time passes the more difficult to change the licenses
[2008-03-01 14:34:46] <atglenn> we still dont know that they *are going to* change licenses.
[2008-03-01 14:35:05] <atglenn> we know tht the board of trustees has approved this resolution
[2008-03-01 14:35:11] <assassingr> I thought we've settled this
[2008-03-01 14:35:26] <atglenn> the next phase, *after* suitable licenses are produced by the CC and the FSF, is
[2008-03-01 14:35:44] <atglenn> a discussion and vote by the wiki community
[2008-03-01 14:35:47] <Juandev> assassingr: agree in that point with you
[2008-03-01 14:35:59] <atglenn> which will certainly depend on the content of the licenses and other factors
[2008-03-01 14:36:14] <mikeu> assassingr - a _lot_ of time has passed since wikipedia was started
[2008-03-01 14:36:29] <assassingr> mikeu: That's ture
[2008-03-01 14:36:31] <assassingr> *true
[2008-03-01 14:36:59] <Juandev> atglenn: and it will be voted via meta globaly or project by project?
[2008-03-01 14:37:19] <atglenn> that was not stated in the resolution nor in the commentaary
[2008-03-01 14:37:22] <mikeu> that is why it is taking so long is to address the issue that editors made edits under a previous license
[2008-03-01 14:37:24] <assassingr> But isn't it most likely the licenses to be changed?
[2008-03-01 14:37:30] <mikeu> many edits
[2008-03-01 14:37:38] <atglenn> assassingr: can you predict the outcome of such a vote? I cannot
[2008-03-01 14:37:53] <HOTR> I think the intent is to craft a new GFDL "3.0"? licence that will be directly compatible with CC-??
[2008-03-01 14:37:54] <atglenn> we don't even have the licenses yet to vote on
[2008-03-01 14:38:11] <dcrochet> HOTR: I THINK SO TOO
[2008-03-01 14:38:13] <dcrochet> oups
[2008-03-01 14:38:23] <dcrochet> sorry for caps
[2008-03-01 14:38:32] <atglenn> HOTR: that is my impression (it would be compatible with some as-yet-to-be-published version of CC-BY-SA.)
[2008-03-01 14:39:07] <Juandev> HOTR: well, if it will be compatibile, than there is no need in swiching on CC - and no problems with swiching license
[2008-03-01 14:39:55] <assassingr> On the other hand, if it will be compatible, why not switch to cc-by-sa?
[2008-03-01 14:40:15] <atglenn> why go through a long messy procedure if you don't have to? ( assassingr )
[2008-03-01 14:40:28] <mikeu> agree atglenn
[2008-03-01 14:40:40] <atglenn> but, the short answer is, that we might want to switch even if the licenses mostly look alike, so that
[2008-03-01 14:40:41] <dcrochet> assassingr: the goal is to switch all project to CC-by-sa
[2008-03-01 14:40:46] <dcrochet> -goal +aim
[2008-03-01 14:41:04] <Juandev> now we know, that Wikinews vote cc licence and they are using it from such date - this spring from the general aims of wikinews to be easily distributed and used also by reporters
[2008-03-01 14:41:04] <atglenn> other projects can use our previously gfdled material
[2008-03-01 14:41:19] <atglenn> we might not want to switch,. even if the licenses look alike, because
[2008-03-01 14:41:25] <assassingr> The thing is, that we don't know how much time will get the foun* to switch the licenses
[2008-03-01 14:41:37] <Juandev> assassingr: according some laws it could be illegal (as stayted on mailing list)
[2008-03-01 14:41:52] <assassingr> yes, I've read that
[2008-03-01 14:41:56] <atglenn> people might have less trust in the CC foundation's willingness to enforce these licenses and protect the 4 basic freedoms
[2008-03-01 14:42:02] <atglenn> as given at freedomdefined.org
[2008-03-01 14:42:07] <HOTR> dcrochet: The "goal" is to have free licences that don't have people getting into legal quandries because of clauses they don't legally understand (or care about, to be frank)
[2008-03-01 14:42:07] <mikeu> changing a license does require someone with knowledge of law to review it
[2008-03-01 14:42:09] <atglenn> than in the FSF.
[2008-03-01 14:42:31] |<-- k2crux has left irc.freenode.net (Connection timed out)
[2008-03-01 14:42:32] <assassingr> I want first to thing about which license is better and then thing about the procedure
[2008-03-01 14:42:50] <dcrochet> HOTR: yes, so use the easier
[2008-03-01 14:42:54] <dcrochet> so the CC
[2008-03-01 14:43:01] <atglenn> well, right now we have neither license to look at. We can only look at the current versions and decide what we would want tobe changed.
[2008-03-01 14:43:34] <atglenn> Wikinews is using CC-BY, not CC-BY-SA. This is a big deal.
[2008-03-01 14:43:39] <atglenn> ( Juandev )
[2008-03-01 14:43:58] <atglenn> I cannot imagine that CC-BY would be adopted by the other projects or approved by the board.
[2008-03-01 14:44:01] <assassingr> that's what I'm talking about. As you stated, the revised version will be compatible, so there is nothing to worry as
[2008-03-01 14:44:03] <assassingr> *us
[2008-03-01 14:44:06] <Juandev> atglenn: I know
[2008-03-01 14:44:50] <Juandev> I think other project such as wikipedia, books, commons will intentend to go for cc-by-sa
[2008-03-01 14:45:57] <Juandev> atglenn: so the question is - what is important for us?
[2008-03-01 14:46:11] <atglenn> assassingr: if the CC is not as agressive about enforcing provisions of their license, or if future versions after we switch compromise on the copyleft principle, as the FSF, this would be a big consideration for a lot of folks.
CC-BY - CC-BY-SA, GPL - GFDL
[edit][2008-03-01 14:46:16] <Juandev> atglenn: do we need cc-by-sa, or we can stay with cc-by
[2008-03-01 14:46:45] <atglenn> do people need a summary of the difference between CC-BY and CC-BY-SA?
[2008-03-01 14:47:07] <atglenn> (and does someone other than me want to give it? I'd like to step back a bit)
[2008-03-01 14:47:33] <Juandev> well, I dont need it
[2008-03-01 14:47:56] <Juandev> if you are using CC license - every time it si CC-BY
[2008-03-01 14:47:57] <assassingr> I guess neither do I
[2008-03-01 14:47:59] -->| kychot (n=petr@n23.dkm.cz) has joined #wikiversity
[2008-03-01 14:48:15] <atglenn> I did not understand your last remark, Juandev.
[2008-03-01 14:48:32] * mikeu reminds people that this meeting is being logged
[2008-03-01 14:48:58] <dcrochet> sorry : http://beta.wikiversity.org/wiki/Englsh_alfabed : No sens title and content
[2008-03-01 14:49:24] <assassingr> From creativecommons.org: Share Alike. You allow others to distribute derivative works only under a license identical to the license that governs your work.
[2008-03-01 14:49:46] <Juandev> I mean that the freedom of the license in in the BY abbreviation - it characterizes the license
[2008-03-01 14:49:51] <Juandev> itself
[2008-03-01 14:51:10] <atglenn> I still don't follow, Juandev (sorry...)
[2008-03-01 14:51:37] <Juandev> than SA means Share Alike which practicaly mean that you cant change a license of redistribured, derivative works
[2008-03-01 14:52:30] <Juandev> if the former work is licensed cc-by-sa you make a derivative (you change the work) - you should offer this work still under cc-by-sa
[2008-03-01 14:52:31] <atglenn> right, it guarantees that others who use the content will have the same rights as you.
[2008-03-01 14:52:59] <Juandev> if it is just licensed cc-by the derivates from your work, might change a license
[2008-03-01 14:53:42] <atglenn> right; they might produce proprietary content using your material.
[2008-03-01 14:53:51] <Juandev> in result it means that works under cc-by can become inacesibble
[2008-03-01 14:53:58] <atglenn> right.
[2008-03-01 14:54:00] <assassingr> Yes. For example, I could take some pictures from commons that are licensed under cc-by and copyright a derivative work that I'll make
[2008-03-01 14:54:45] <Juandev> so "limiting" a little bit the rights for the people is good, that also the derivative works are under the same "free" license
[2008-03-01 14:54:53] <Juandev> why news having cc-by?
[2008-03-01 14:55:35] <atglenn> I don't think of it as limiting rights but as protecting rights.
[2008-03-01 14:55:43] <Juandev> well, as I heard from some users, it was because they think they will ofer knews to real reporters and real reporters cant make derivative work using cc-by -sa license
[2008-03-01 14:55:51] <assassingr> atglenn: I second that
[2008-03-01 14:56:24] <assassingr> That sounds logical to me
[2008-03-01 14:56:32] <mikeu> there are almost no court cases involving free licenses, so there is no proof that any of these license restrictions are enforcable
[2008-03-01 14:56:36] <Juandev> assassingr: yes
[2008-03-01 14:56:43] <atglenn> actually there are several cases
[2008-03-01 14:56:48] <mikeu> a few
[2008-03-01 14:57:00] <Juandev> atglenn: yeah, nicely said, not limiting but protecting - I agree
[2008-03-01 14:57:14] <HOTR> mikeu: You should distinguish between GPL works and GFDL
[2008-03-01 14:57:34] <HOTR> I think there is NO case law w/ respect to Free documentation licences.
[2008-03-01 14:57:36] <mikeu> hotr court law?
[2008-03-01 14:57:39] <atglenn> the GFDL as far as I know has not been examined in any court case
[2008-03-01 14:57:44] <HOTR> GPL does have some though.
[2008-03-01 14:57:45] <Juandev> atglenn: court cases - let us know
[2008-03-01 14:57:57] <atglenn> but the GPL which has a similar structure has been treated as a valid license
[2008-03-01 14:58:03] <atglenn> in several instances.
[2008-03-01 14:58:06] -->| h (n=55d38e31@gateway/web/cgi-irc/wikizine.org/x-7702b3c528bc99ce) has joined #wikiversity
[2008-03-01 14:58:33] <HOTR> similar structure means it can be cited, but it's not a precedent.
[2008-03-01 14:58:53] <atglenn> it's a very good guide to what the courts will likely do.
[2008-03-01 14:59:01] <HOTR> Any case that involves the GFDL, or any of the CC licences would be new case law, AFAIK
[2008-03-01 15:00:11] <HOTR> atglenn: There is no such thing as a "good guide" when there is no case precedent. Judges are fickle beasts, and you never know how they are going to rule, or how many appeals it might take to get a similar ruling to a previous one.
[2008-03-01 15:00:13] <atglenn> in any case, either we assume that the courts will valiate these licenses, or there's no point in using them.
[2008-03-01 15:02:00] <mikeu> this is why we need a lawyer to advise us on how a court will interpret a license for a wiki project
[2008-03-01 15:02:18] <assassingr> A question: de.wv has switched to cc license. What would be the advantages and disadvantages for it if WMF switch to a revised license?
[2008-03-01 15:02:28] <atglenn> cases nvolving the GPL are summarised here: http://www.opensourcelegal.org/laws.php ( Juandev )
[2008-03-01 15:02:34] <Juandev> dcrochet: done
[2008-03-01 15:02:42] <dcrochet> thanks
[2008-03-01 15:03:39] <Juandev> mikeu: which court, I mean in which country?
[2008-03-01 15:04:01] <atglenn> http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20060316052623594 this covers a case involving the CC-BY-NC-SA. .
[2008-03-01 15:04:03] <mikeu> there are lawyers that deal with muli-national license and contract issues
[2008-03-01 15:04:28] <Juandev> assassingr: well, important to stayed that license it is in the hands of users from the appropriate project, not WMF
[2008-03-01 15:05:05] <Juandev> mikeu: but, I can imagine if problems - it may be well, everywhere
[2008-03-01 15:05:15] <assassingr> Juandev: Didn't get what you meant
[2008-03-01 15:05:37] <Juandev> mikeu: do we have some layers on the user level within wikiversity or wikiprojects who can help
[2008-03-01 15:06:08] <mikeu> WMF is probably the better place to look
[2008-03-01 15:06:28] <Juandev> assassingr: I am trying to answer your question, there will be no advantages or disadvantages - they will stay with their license
[2008-03-01 15:07:04] <atglenn> I should point out that both Eben Moglen and Lawrence Lessing have spent a chunk of time thinking about jurisdictional and enforcement issues of these licenses.
[2008-03-01 15:07:12] <Juandev> assassingr: I mean they will enjoy same difficulties and same fruits until the time, other projects will have the same license
[2008-03-01 15:07:16] <assassingr> I see. But there are advantages for it now that they have switched to cc?
[2008-03-01 15:07:16] <atglenn> (It's in their interests to do so.)
[2008-03-01 15:07:56] <Juandev> mikeu: and WMF is probably the best user, who can find a layer based on intenational license law
[2008-03-01 15:08:31] <Juandev> assassingr: lets disturb Erkan for the moments
[2008-03-01 15:08:44] <Juandev> Erkan_Yilmaz: can we disturb you for a moment?
[2008-03-01 15:08:59] <Erkan_Yilmaz> hi Juandev
[2008-03-01 15:09:06] <Erkan_Yilmaz> sorry that I don't take part I am in another chat meeting
[2008-03-01 15:09:09] <Erkan_Yilmaz> please ask
advantages for de.WV to have cc-by-sa 2.5 license
[edit][2008-03-01 15:09:35] <Juandev> Erkan_Yilmaz: assassingr asked what are advatages for de.wv to have cc license?
[2008-03-01 15:10:07] <Erkan_Yilmaz> because it is freer to use by others than GFDL
[2008-03-01 15:10:10] <Juandev> and if you also see some difficulties
[2008-03-01 15:10:15] <Erkan_Yilmaz> difficulties: yes
[2008-03-01 15:10:27] <Erkan_Yilmaz> you can not so easily copy+paste form other projects, but...
[2008-03-01 15:10:41] <Erkan_Yilmaz> projects should be different in their activities, so I personally see this as not bad
[2008-03-01 15:10:58] <Erkan_Yilmaz> about why GFDL and not CC-by-sa there is a link, one mom
[2008-03-01 15:11:01] <Juandev> so if I copy from books one page, I should stayed it is GFdl, right?
[2008-03-01 15:11:15] <Erkan_Yilmaz> in German: http://de.wikiversity.org/wiki/Wikiversity:FAQ#Warum_verwendet_ihr_in_der_Wikiversity_nicht_die_GNU_FDL.3F
[2008-03-01 15:11:34] <Juandev> assassingr: do you speak German?
[2008-03-01 15:11:49] -->| Daan (n=chatzill@226-32-215.ftth.xms.internl.net) has joined #wikiversity
[2008-03-01 15:11:54] <Erkan_Yilmaz> you could use google translator - or I shortly summarize it ?
[2008-03-01 15:11:58] <Erkan_Yilmaz> hi Daan :-)
[2008-03-01 15:12:11] <Daan> Hi Erkan
[2008-03-01 15:12:14] <Juandev> Erkan_Yilmaz: ah, you are so smart
[2008-03-01 15:12:22] <Daan> This is Wikiversity Beta, isn't it?
[2008-03-01 15:12:28] <Erkan_Yilmaz> yup
[2008-03-01 15:12:30] <Daan> So, i can talk dutch now :)
[2008-03-01 15:12:35] <Erkan_Yilmaz> well the German text in quick summary tells:
[2008-03-01 15:12:39] <Daan> Goedenavond iedereen
[2008-03-01 15:12:46] <Erkan_Yilmaz> 1. cc-by-sa for others more easy to use than GFDL
[2008-03-01 15:13:01] <Erkan_Yilmaz> 2. gfdl causes more legal insecurity than cc-by-sa
[2008-03-01 15:13:14] <Erkan_Yilmaz> there is this FAQ about gfdl disadvantages, also in German: http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benutzer:Historiograf/GNU_FDL_Highway_to_Hell_-_FAQ
[2008-03-01 15:13:25] <atglenn> I would want to see their reasoning for point 2.
[2008-03-01 15:13:42] <Erkan_Yilmaz> I think we at de.Wv changed in August 2006 to cc-by-sa
[2008-03-01 15:13:55] * Daan wants to warn Erkan that he is still suffering from a hangover :(
[2008-03-01 15:14:07] <Erkan_Yilmaz> well then the last link should give more info on that, but it is in German
[2008-03-01 15:14:36] <Erkan_Yilmaz> Daan is here because we were doing another chat meeting and I don't want that he feels alone there since the 3rd partner left and assassingr is busy talking here
[2008-03-01 15:14:44] <Daan> It is prety busy here today, or are most people offline?
[2008-03-01 15:14:47] <atglenn> august 2006 is right, Erkan_Yilmaz.
[2008-03-01 15:15:34] <Daan> I will look at the english chat for a while.
[2008-03-01 15:15:37] <Juandev> Erkan_Yilmaz: also the pages edited before this date recieved cc license?
[2008-03-01 15:15:50] <Erkan_Yilmaz> Daan it is ok, when we are here a little bit ? I would like to continue our chat anyway ok ?
[2008-03-01 15:15:59] <Daan> Oh, this is the official meeting?
[2008-03-01 15:16:08] |<-- h has left irc.freenode.net ("CGI:IRC (Ping timeout)")
[2008-03-01 15:16:11] <dcrochet> Daan: yes
[2008-03-01 15:16:14] <Erkan_Yilmaz> well, that I don't know, but would not be nice because the authors of that edits should have been asked
[2008-03-01 15:16:16] <Daan> Sorry about my vandalising practise. :(
[2008-03-01 15:16:34] <Erkan_Yilmaz> ah sorry misunderstood
[2008-03-01 15:17:10] <Erkan_Yilmaz> would have to read about that, but again: better to do this only for pages created afterwards - that is fair for the authors
current info on wikinews
[edit][2008-03-01 15:17:21] <mikeu> question: is this the current info on wikinews? http://en.wikinews.org/wiki/Wikinews_switches_to_Creative_Commons_license
[2008-03-01 15:17:29] * Erkan_Yilmaz clicks
[2008-03-01 15:17:58] <atglenn> the standard method for change is to designate all future contributions under the new license (example: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:GFDL_upgrade )
[2008-03-01 15:18:17] <atglenn> but that is not what the board has in mind here, I believe.
[2008-03-01 15:18:38] <Erkan_Yilmaz> could someone give a short overview (also in private) about what was talked so far ?
[2008-03-01 15:18:54] * Juandev just translated first link of Erkan via babelfish:-)
[2008-03-01 15:18:58] * mikeu reminds everyone that this conversation is being logged
[2008-03-01 15:19:10] <Juandev> atglenn: let me see
[2008-03-01 15:19:11] <atglenn> yes, mikeu, almost all wikinews projects use CC-BY at the moment.
[2008-03-01 15:19:12] <Erkan_Yilmaz> you have my permission :-)
[2008-03-01 15:19:14] <Daan> What does logged mean?
[2008-03-01 15:19:30] <Erkan_Yilmaz> they are releasing later the chat edits
[2008-03-01 15:19:35] <mikeu> we are saving a file of everything discussed in this meeting to post on beta wv
[2008-03-01 15:19:37] <Juandev> Daan: it means that it will be displayed via beta
[2008-03-01 15:19:46] <Daan> Ah okay. I didn't compromise myself yet :)
[2008-03-01 15:19:53] <Erkan_Yilmaz> haha
[2008-03-01 15:20:02] <Erkan_Yilmaz> others can also tell things about you and this gets logged
[2008-03-01 15:20:18] <Juandev> mikeu: so we can detete daan later from log
[2008-03-01 15:20:38] <mikeu> so wikinews changed the license for the entire project based on only 31 votes from editors?
[2008-03-01 15:20:45] <Daan> That isn't nice :(
[2008-03-01 15:20:55] <Erkan_Yilmaz> it depends how many active people are there
[2008-03-01 15:21:30] <Erkan_Yilmaz> e.g. for the de.WV slogan in the last round we had 16 participants
[2008-03-01 15:22:21] <Juandev> atglenn: hmmm, interesting
[2008-03-01 15:22:34] <atglenn> well, ... it's interesting their phrasing, mikeu. because be wikinews uses the GFDL :-D
[2008-03-01 15:23:50] -->| H (n=55d38e31@gateway/web/cgi-irc/wikizine.org/x-aba2e5417b03b57d) has joined #wikiversity
[2008-03-01 15:23:56] <atglenn> of course in 2005 the editing community (ies) was probably very small....
[2008-03-01 15:24:01] <Erkan_Yilmaz> hi H
[2008-03-01 15:24:08] <Erkan_Yilmaz> H you are histo ?
[2008-03-01 15:24:49] <Erkan_Yilmaz> so guys where are we now ?
[2008-03-01 15:25:16] <Juandev> Erkan_Yilmaz: I think histo is hotr
[2008-03-01 15:25:22] <Erkan_Yilmaz> ok
[2008-03-01 15:25:49] * Juandev reads german links
plans of WMF ?
[edit][2008-03-01 15:26:21] <mikeu> Erkan I think we need to get more info about WMF making a change for all projects
[2008-03-01 15:26:21] <HOTR> Erkan_Yilmaz: Yes
[2008-03-01 15:26:41] <Erkan_Yilmaz> well I would assume WMF would take more time to bring a change or ?
[2008-03-01 15:27:09] <Erkan_Yilmaz> because some people at wikimedia projects would not want a change for their edits now - how to handle them ?
[2008-03-01 15:27:12] <mikeu> we really don't know what (if any) progress has been made since the resolution
[2008-03-01 15:27:21] <Erkan_Yilmaz> someone here officially from WMF ?
[2008-03-01 15:27:33] <Erkan_Yilmaz> as I see perhaps H ?
[2008-03-01 15:27:40] <atglenn> I talked to a staff member about a week ago; he said that the license change is not on the board's agenda right now.
[2008-03-01 15:27:56] <Erkan_Yilmaz> :-(
[2008-03-01 15:27:58] <atglenn> (he asked someone on the board at that moment.)
[2008-03-01 15:28:05] -->| _sj_ (n=sj_@wikipedia/sj) has joined #wikiversity
[2008-03-01 15:28:06] <assassingr> back from call
[2008-03-01 15:28:13] <atglenn> in the meantime however, people at cc or fsf may be doing work.
[2008-03-01 15:28:21] <Erkan_Yilmaz> as I see before this meeting also people were strongly opposed to a possible change - we are just discussing now here of course
[2008-03-01 15:28:50] |<-- H has left irc.freenode.net ("CGI:IRC (Ping timeout)")
[2008-03-01 15:28:57] <Erkan_Yilmaz> btw: what are plans on el.WV ?
[2008-03-01 15:29:05] <Juandev> Erkan_Yilmaz: we can make a line and say, all revisions untill this time are gfdl
[2008-03-01 15:29:08] <atglenn> Erkan_Yilmaz: the possibility for rollover dicussed on the foundation list was to post a deadline for contributors who did not agree with the new license to remove their contributions.
[2008-03-01 15:29:14] <Erkan_Yilmaz> you are still a young project and a licence change could easier be done than later when you have more contributions or ?
[2008-03-01 15:29:23] <Juandev> Erkan_Yilmaz: but not realistig within big projects such as wikipedia
[2008-03-01 15:29:35] <assassingr> I agree with the "easier done" thing
[2008-03-01 15:29:49] <assassingr> We haven't talked about it yet
[2008-03-01 15:30:01] <Erkan_Yilmaz> Juandev well would be interesting to see the poll for the licence change
[2008-03-01 15:30:08] <assassingr> I was waiting for this meeting\
[2008-03-01 15:30:29] <Erkan_Yilmaz> atglenn - are there any opposers on the list already ? how much are there ?
[2008-03-01 15:30:55] <atglenn> yes, there are some folks who believe that they should stick with future versions of the GFDL. .
[2008-03-01 15:30:57] <Juandev> atglenn: huh, really drastic
[2008-03-01 15:31:29] <Erkan_Yilmaz> well what about if WMF decides against their will ?
[2008-03-01 15:31:32] <Erkan_Yilmaz> is this a wiki way ?
[2008-03-01 15:31:43] <atglenn> the communities decide, not the board.
[2008-03-01 15:31:48] <Erkan_Yilmaz> against their will to introduce a licence change
[2008-03-01 15:31:50] <atglenn> ( Erkan_Yilmaz )
[2008-03-01 15:31:53] <Erkan_Yilmaz> good
[2008-03-01 15:32:09] <Erkan_Yilmaz> so but we don't have yet some info about tendencies of the communities somewhere ?
[2008-03-01 15:32:37] <atglenn> there are dicussions on various fora, but about all I can get form that is that
[2008-03-01 15:32:50] <atglenn> some people are very supportive and some people are very opposed
[2008-03-01 15:32:59] <Erkan_Yilmaz> I see
[2008-03-01 15:33:01] <atglenn> really, the picture will change when we have the revised licenses, too.
[2008-03-01 15:33:18] <Erkan_Yilmaz> ok, also that is another topic
[2008-03-01 15:33:19] <atglenn> right now we're all just arguing based on the current versions... not so helpful.
[2008-03-01 15:33:30] <assassingr> So, atglenn, you opinion is that we should wait for the revised versions?
possible actions
[edit][2008-03-01 15:33:40] <Erkan_Yilmaz> so what are possible actions from this meeting ?
[2008-03-01 15:34:16] <Erkan_Yilmaz> 1. wait and see 2. do a poll to get some info about tendency (no real vote for changing of licence meant here)
[2008-03-01 15:34:20] <atglenn> we can certainly discuss things before that... but be ready to revise our opinions later.
[2008-03-01 15:34:34] <Erkan_Yilmaz> 3. come together in a few weeks to see what has happened ?
[2008-03-01 15:34:50] <Juandev> hmmm
[2008-03-01 15:35:34] <Juandev> from my point of view
[2008-03-01 15:36:28] <Juandev> we can make a poll - even like wikiversitians interested to know how i works
[2008-03-01 15:36:45] <Juandev> what others think?
[2008-03-01 15:37:02] <Erkan_Yilmaz> I am for a poll - doesn't hurt and we can get more attention on the topic itself
[2008-03-01 15:37:19] <Erkan_Yilmaz> we are still talking about things and this should be allowed anytime
[2008-03-01 15:37:32] <assassingr> you mean make a poll now here?
[2008-03-01 15:37:37] <Juandev> I think it is good to know, to be prepared for the official discussion promoted by WMF later on
[2008-03-01 15:37:48] <Erkan_Yilmaz> we can do here and also on beta announcing to take part in the poll
[2008-03-01 15:37:50] <atglenn> do you want to propose some language for the poll? ( Juandev )
[2008-03-01 15:38:11] <Erkan_Yilmaz> I could translate into some languages
[2008-03-01 15:38:22] <Erkan_Yilmaz> German, French, Turkish
[2008-03-01 15:38:26] <Juandev> atglenn: ?
[2008-03-01 15:38:28] <assassingr> French?
[2008-03-01 15:38:36] <assassingr> I would rather dcrochet do this ;)
[2008-03-01 15:38:40] <dcrochet> :-)
[2008-03-01 15:38:41] <Erkan_Yilmaz> or dcrochet does the French part :-)
[2008-03-01 15:38:53] <Erkan_Yilmaz> yeah, agreed dcrochet should do the work haha
[2008-03-01 15:38:59] <Erkan_Yilmaz> you agree dcrochet ?
[2008-03-01 15:39:00] <assassingr> :D
[2008-03-01 15:39:08] <dcrochet> if it's not difficult
[2008-03-01 15:39:16] <assassingr> I can into Greek
[2008-03-01 15:39:17] <Erkan_Yilmaz> cool, merci
[2008-03-01 15:39:17] <atglenn> Juandev: you proposed doing a poll. do you want to give us a draft of what it might say?
[2008-03-01 15:39:27] <assassingr> or atglenn? ;)
[2008-03-01 15:39:36] <mikeu> see also en:Template:Wmdgs-GFDL vs. CC
[2008-03-01 15:39:37] <wikiversilinky> http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/Template:Wmdgs-GFDL_vs._CC
[2008-03-01 15:39:50] <Juandev> atglenn: no idea about this
[2008-03-01 15:40:02] <Juandev> I can translate it to Czech and Spanish
[2008-03-01 15:40:11] <atglenn> assassingr: I'll just wait for you to call and ask what to do with some weird phrase... :-P
[2008-03-01 15:40:19] <Erkan_Yilmaz> mikeu - http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/Special:Whatlinkshere/Template:Wmdgs-GFDL_vs._CC
[2008-03-01 15:40:28] <Erkan_Yilmaz> perhaps we can now get more than 3 people for this survey :-)
[2008-03-01 15:40:48] <assassingr> atglenn: And you better be more of a help next time :P
[2008-03-01 15:41:04] <atglenn> or...?
[2008-03-01 15:41:11] * atglenn waits to hear the consequences
[2008-03-01 15:41:12] <mikeu> Erkan there was some discussion that those questions should be reworded
[2008-03-01 15:41:35] <Erkan_Yilmaz> mikeu - last time edited 15th January :-(
[2008-03-01 15:41:44] <assassingr> or nothing. I try to get my karma better the past few days
[2008-03-01 15:41:55] * Juandev just got what poll means in Czech
[2008-03-01 15:42:32] <mikeu> because of this there is no link to survey at en:Wikimedian Demographics
[2008-03-01 15:42:33] <wikiversilinky> http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/Wikimedian_Demographics
[2008-03-01 15:42:39] * Juandev is than not sure if poll is the right idea
[2008-03-01 15:42:47] <Erkan_Yilmaz> what would you propose ?
[2008-03-01 15:43:19] <Juandev> Erkan_Yilmaz: option no 3
[2008-03-01 15:43:55] <Juandev> or why not to make a survey within Wikiversity
[2008-03-01 15:43:55] <mikeu> I would suggest discussion continue in page at beta, between now and next meeting
[2008-03-01 15:43:57] <assassingr> I thought was more of a set than individual option
[2008-03-01 15:44:04] <assassingr> *options
[2008-03-01 15:44:12] <Juandev> and or other projects - a silent survey there
[2008-03-01 15:44:20] <Erkan_Yilmaz> why silent ?
[2008-03-01 15:44:33] <Erkan_Yilmaz> we can talk about things also openly with an announcement at beta main page or not ?
[2008-03-01 15:44:44] -->| amidaniel (n=amidanie@wikipedia/AmiDaniel) has joined #wikiversity
[2008-03-01 15:44:49] <Erkan_Yilmaz> announcement link to the discussion
[2008-03-01 15:44:51] <Erkan_Yilmaz> hi amidaniel
[2008-03-01 15:44:55] <Juandev> Erkan_Yilmaz: note to prowoke a commotion
[2008-03-01 15:45:23] <Erkan_Yilmaz> well it just helps if we have discussion - even if it is with commotion
[2008-03-01 15:45:31] <Erkan_Yilmaz> so we get to know all sides of the story
[2008-03-01 15:46:01] <Erkan_Yilmaz> I guess the normal user is probably not too much interested in this - but the deeper involved persons should know
[2008-03-01 15:46:38] <Juandev> so as mikeu said, lets continue to talk and inform each other via Beta and after some time, if something crucial will happened well arrange another irc meeting
[2008-03-01 15:46:48] <Erkan_Yilmaz> ok
[2008-03-01 15:47:01] <Juandev> within the time we can make a survey and call it "survey" not "poll"
[2008-03-01 15:47:06] <mikeu> we should also start a discussion at WMF
[2008-03-01 15:47:10] <atglenn> at some point I'll put the information I gathered up someplace...
[2008-03-01 15:47:37] <atglenn> it would be nice to have a central clearinghouse anyways with pointers to any other dicussions, etc.
[2008-03-01 15:47:41] <atglenn> but, where?
[2008-03-01 15:47:50] <Erkan_Yilmaz> on beta or ?
[2008-03-01 15:47:55] <atglenn> (survey sounds good)
[2008-03-01 15:48:20] <atglenn> Erkan_Yilmaz: not beta, I think.. eventually this license issue is going to concern all of the communities)
[2008-03-01 15:48:24] * Juandev 5 min afk
[2008-03-01 15:48:35] <Juandev> mikeu: do you think they will communicate
[2008-03-01 15:48:47] <Juandev> mikeu: they might be tired of us than
[2008-03-01 15:48:56] <Erkan_Yilmaz> communities meaning outside of WV ?
[2008-03-01 15:48:59] <atglenn> yes
[2008-03-01 15:49:04] <atglenn> ( Erkan_Yilmaz )
[2008-03-01 15:49:13] <Erkan_Yilmaz> well perhaps there is something already somewhere - who wants to find out ?
[2008-03-01 15:49:13] <Juandev> atglenn: you mean Meta?
[2008-03-01 15:49:38] <Erkan_Yilmaz> Juandev - if people don't communicate we can pester them until they will :-)
[2008-03-01 15:49:43] <atglenn> Juandev: I don't know where we should put collected niformation. that's what I'm asking
[2008-03-01 15:50:02] <Juandev> if youll rise something on Meta other communities who allready disscused will say: we already discused
[2008-03-01 15:50:09] <Erkan_Yilmaz> then put it somewhere and later we can still transfer (keeping in notice the licence of course :-) )
[2008-03-01 15:51:32] <Juandev> or we can make it on Beta and link it here via announcment from other projects?
[2008-03-01 15:51:41] <atglenn> the dicussions I have seen, Juandev, look mostly like: shoudl we worry? I dunno... well I like the gfdl because of this.. .well, I think the cc-by-sa has these features... and then silence. (as with many dicussions, not actual conclusions)
[2008-03-01 15:52:01] <atglenn> please excuse the typos...
[2008-03-01 15:52:09] <Erkan_Yilmaz> you can correct later in the log
[2008-03-01 15:52:22] <atglenn> I have a slight preference for meta over beta. are there other options?
[2008-03-01 15:52:25] <mikeu> I will place the log of this meeting at http://beta.wikiversity.org/wiki/Wikiversity:IRC_meeting:New_licence_for_Wikiversity_Beta/log
[2008-03-01 15:53:40] <Juandev> atglenn: horible, I mean discussions like those you mentioned
[2008-03-01 15:53:49] <Erkan_Yilmaz> well going to meta brings more attention, but we still dont have the feeling/tendency of the beta community and requesting from them to make a new account at meta perhaps hinders them in discussing ?
[2008-03-01 15:54:27] <mikeu> maybe we start at beta and then copy a summary to meta later?
[2008-03-01 15:54:44] <atglenn> oh. perhaps we are talking about 2 things: 1) the beta discussion (which should be posted at beta) 2) general information for people interested in the license issue for WMF
[2008-03-01 15:55:00] <Erkan_Yilmaz> ok, so lets do both in parallel
[2008-03-01 15:55:12] <Erkan_Yilmaz> who wants to be ambassador in these ?
[2008-03-01 15:55:35] <assassingr> I dunno, the discussion was supposed to be for change license for wikiversity, not alla projects, so I guess be is more appropriate
[2008-03-01 15:55:39] <Erkan_Yilmaz> volunteers one step forward
[2008-03-01 15:55:57] * assassingr steps back
[2008-03-01 15:55:59] <assassingr> :)
[2008-03-01 15:56:02] <Erkan_Yilmaz> haha
[2008-03-01 15:56:03] <Erkan_Yilmaz> atglenn you do this on meta then ?
[2008-03-01 15:56:19] <atglenn> I will be happy to find someplace on meta to put general informaton
[2008-03-01 15:56:25] <Erkan_Yilmaz> thx atglenn
[2008-03-01 15:56:31] <Erkan_Yilmaz> please keep us informed
[2008-03-01 15:56:32] <atglenn> (probably within a week, I can't guarantee today.)
[2008-03-01 15:56:38] <atglenn> I sure will
[2008-03-01 15:57:01] <mikeu> yes, post a link at http://beta.wikiversity.org/wiki/Wikiversity:IRC_meeting:New_licence_for_Wikiversity_Beta for any info at meta
[2008-03-01 15:57:31] <atglenn> ok. I will make sure to do this.
[2008-03-01 15:57:46] <Erkan_Yilmaz> since I did not saw the begin of the chat - which topic left ?
[2008-03-01 15:57:55] <mikeu> is there any more discussion??
[2008-03-01 15:58:37] <assassingr> I guess not
[2008-03-01 15:58:41] <Erkan_Yilmaz> yeah, I would like to know who really now took part here from the announced people
[2008-03-01 15:58:46] <Erkan_Yilmaz> only 5 or so ?
[2008-03-01 15:58:55] <atglenn> (I didn't ever sign up :-) )
[2008-03-01 15:59:02] <assassingr> You want the juicy staff then? :D
[2008-03-01 15:59:05] <Erkan_Yilmaz> you are always welcome
[2008-03-01 15:59:06] <Daan> Me too, and i was very active.
[2008-03-01 15:59:08] <mikeu> ok, I will now stop the log and save it