Milos Rancic wrote: > On Sun, Nov 16, 2008 at 5:26 PM, Thomas Dalton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Since you could delete the GFDL-only version and remake it as a dual >> licensed version after the switchover (assuming we do switchover), I >> can't see how there could a problem. (Assuming you are the only person >> to modify it, otherwise you need to be careful about what licenses the >> modifications are released under.) >
As an owner of an (experimental) partial fork of WP, I'm also interested in this issue. My interpretation is that the migration clauses in GFDL 1.3 apply to all wikis, not just Wikimedia's. So anyone running a GFDL wiki (assuming "or later version" text is intact), can migrate the content to cc-by-sa anytime up to the deadline. This includes WP content that has been modified on my wiki. Obviously to do so before Wikimedia has decided if it is going to do so would be a bad idea if one wants to continue to bring updates across from WP (as this would be impossible after the deadline has passed). Also, AIUI the dual-license thing is a private arrangement between the FSF and Wikimedia? Therefore I do not have to honour it - I could in theory migrate to cc-by-sa only? However this would make it difficult or impossible to bring updates on my wiki back over into Wikipedia (so I probably won't do this - I want to maintain bidirectional sharing) However IANAL, so I would appreciate any comments on whether my interpretation is flawed in some way. Rgrds. _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
