[Celinux-dev] Re: Policy Document (for embedded wiki)

[Matt Mackall]

On Mon, Oct 16, 2006 at 12:21:34PM +0900, Paul Mundt wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 13, 2006 at 05:19:58PM -0500, Matt Mackall wrote:
> > On Fri, Oct 13, 2006 at 02:10:46PM -0700, Tim Bird wrote:
> > > Matt Mackall wrote:
> > > > b) the GFDL's advantages for our purposes aren't obvious
> > > > 
> > > >   The protections it gives beyond what the GPL gives are mainly aimed
> > > >   at printed works where authorship is a valuable asset (see invariant
> > > >   sections), but authorship on wikis is a fairly nebulous concept.
> > > I agree.
> > 
> > I'd like to see a rationale for using the GFDL. I don't know of any
> > aside from "Wikipedia does".
> > 
> I'm curious how this doesn't define a rationale in and of itself. The
> fundamental premise behind the embedded linux wiki is to be
> complimentary to wikipedia where it makes sense. There's a lot of
> content there already, and we don't want to reproduce things needlessly,
> especially with regards to licensing.
> 
> Likewise, if we have things that are better off being migrated to
> wikipedia, then having compatability on the license makes sense.

Interesting.

I don't really see us needing to reproduce Wikipedia content.
Cross-linking is perfectly acceptable. Wikipedia already has plenty of
cross-linking with other wikis in particular topics and that seems to
be good practice.

As for whether we'll want to migrate stuff off of our wiki to
Wikipedia, yeah, I suppose that could happen.
 
> As far as the code snippet issue is concerned, are we really expecting
> the typical use case to be copying and pasting of GPL'ed code to make a
> point?

I wouldn't say "typical", but I would say "common".

Another thing I mentioned is making our content available for
inclusion in the kernel docs. If we're successful, I think that will
be a more common case than moving stuff to Wikipedia.

-- 
Mathematics is the supreme nostalgia of our time.