NDWiki:Community Portal/Archive 2011

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

License

ND Wiki uses the GFDL version 1.2. Wouldn't it be better to upgrade to 1.3 and then to CC-BY-SA, to be compatible to Wikipedia? --LA2 06:55, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

Yes! Is it possible to do that in one step? --Mike 07:44, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

There are two ways: (1) If you can convince every contributor to relicense their contributions, you can change to any license at any time. I guess this is possible on ndwiki, considering how few contributors you have. How many contributors do you have? If most agree, can you afford to drop the contributions by the rest? (2) The other way is to follow the transition rules in GFDL 1.2 and 1.3, but this requires that you respect some deadline, which might already be too late. --LA2 08:47, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

The deadline for option (2) was in August 1, 2009. NDWiki have the same reason to change as Wikipedia. See GFDL 1.3: Wikipedia's exit permit. Now we need all the major contributors agreement to "upgrade" the license. /Mike 10:27, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

How to do this in practice? We all add a statement (e.g. "everything I write may be licensed through CC-BY-SA") on our User pages? -- TArntsen 10:42, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

If you need my agreement for changing the license of my contributions you have it now. Mike may change the license of my contributions to NDWiki to any license he think is appropriate.
So, that would take care of the legality and I can get back to doing real work. I'll continue to add more material soon, too much work right now. :-) --Gandalf 12:13, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

The only users who have contributed to the wiki, except their own presentation, are Gandalf, LA2, me, Roger, Svinhufvud and TArntsen. It would be nice to also have Rogers and Svinhufvuds acceptance. /Mike 09:59, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

What about licenses for uploaded files? I wanted to upload my source code for a tool that I wrote, I've licensed it under GPLV3. But the upload form license selection only includes GPLV2 (and I wish it would allow .tar.gz too.. not just .tgz, but that's just a minor inconvenience). --TArntsen 14:02, 13 September 2011 (CEST)

I'm trying to upload a file with the new license, using .tgz as it's one of those accepted ones, but I get this "File extension does not match MIME type" error. It seems to very (too) strict about file naming. --TArntsen 11:15, 1 October 2011 (CEST)

Hi! I think it´s some sort of paranoia from uploading ziped files among the Mediawiki developers (I gues the only code uploaded should be non-zipped sorcecode). I tried to loosen up the restrictions, but I only manage to upload a bzipped tar file (.bz2). Is that ok? The new GPLv3 is also default (and only choice) for GPL. /Mike 15:18, 1 October 2011 (CEST)