Hoi,
Given that the GFDL is a viral license, it is not obvious that we should
accept GFDL only material.
Thanks,
GerardM
2009/6/24 Pharos <pharosofalexand...@gmail.com>
> On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 11:57 AM, David Gerard<dger...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > 2009/6/24 Pedro Sanchez <pdsanc...@gmail.com>:
> >
> >> With the license move...
> >> do we still accept GFDL-only material?
> >> I've seen OTRSer today accepting and tagging entries released as GFDL
> only.
> >
> >
> > Is this images for Commons? I'd personally like to deprecate the GFDL,
> > but if it's a Commons-accepted free content licence then there's no
> > reason not to accept it.
>
> Of course, there are and always have been a wide range of free content
> licenses used for images on Commons, not just GFDL and CC.
>
> Thanks,
> Pharos
>
> >
> > - d.
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > foundation-l mailing list
> > foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
