maria-discuss team mailing list archive

[Henrik Ingo <henrik.ingo@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Tue, Sep 22, 2009 at 6:37 PM, Daniel Bartholomew <dbart@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/
>
> This is the license used by Wikipedia and the share-alike part of the
> license ensures that the content remains open. It's a common license
> and is well understood and liked by a lot of people.
>
> Henrik mentioned the problem of attribution with CC licenses, but I
> don't think this is an issue with the mediawiki software we're
> using because of the edit histories and edit summaries, both of which
> fulfill this requirement. For example, the history page for the PBXT
> entry in the manual attributes me and Paul McCullagh for our
> contributions to the article:
>
> http://askmonty.org/wiki/index.php?title=Manual:PBXT_storage_engine&action=history

But imagine a day when we have some software other than mediawiki for
this? (Maybe metadata is ported?)

Imagine you wanting to publish a book of the MariaDB manual, the
attribution section would make for some interesting read.

I am curious how Wikipedia does this? Potentially they'll publish
themselves on a CD one day? I knew they were contemplating to change,
but didn't notice it happening. What were the arguments in favor?

> I don't have much experience with the FDL, so if someone has reasons why
> we should use it, please share.

In copyleft documentation licenses... there aren't that many to choose from :-(

henrik
-- 
email: henrik.ingo@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
tel:   +358-40-5697354
www:   www.avoinelama.fi/~hingo
book:  www.openlife.cc