> Wikimedia policy is to use only free software, at least on the > "customer-facing" side. That includes the PDF-generation process, > which runs on our servers AFAIK. > > Requiring this from sites we (in essence) link to seems excessive. We > link to Google Maps via an intermediate page, similar to PediaPress, > and their code is not 100% open source either, last time I looked.
I'm just saying the reason to kvetch about Pediapress is not that they produce books or that they are a company that makes money. The more serious complaint is that they are presently have monopoly status, and that this monopoly is mostly made possible because there is no free/open source toolchain that does what they offer. There's nothing to stop the interested party from linking to OpenStreetMap (http://www.openstreetmap.org/) instead of Google Maps, and their code is available too (http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/The_Rails_Port). But in any case, no one refers to Google Maps as an "open source" product. Referring to something as "open source" when it isn't is a bad practice. _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
