I still dont see Evans point -- what would be the
reason for breaking from GNU FDL at all? Its not the
software that drives wiki -- its the open principle
that drives the softwares development (no to mention
the WP's resonance) -- the FDL is simply a way to
codify that principle. Quote: "Contributors (OK,
all 20 so far B-) and redistributors of Wikitravel"
That 20, considering the WP ratio of 1000
contributors/100 regulars (?)-- might be more like 2.
If you bog down your project with unnecessary legalese
-- you might be holding steady at 2 until fresh-baked
Plutonium-239 has gone through a few half-lives.
-S-
Evan-
Ah, yes. And, being as
wikitravel.org and every
contributor would be
copying, deriving, etc., this is kind of a
problem.
I'm really grateful for the Wikipedia
software,
and I'd like to figure
out a way to make Wikipedia and Wikitravel
content
miscible. If it was
just _me_ having to put up with the hassle, well,
that's fine.
But, y'know, it's not me who'd pay
the price. It's
all the
contributors (OK, all 20 so far B-) and
redistributors of Wikitravel
that would have to pay. I don't think
that's
really fair.
I still don't see the problem. If you dual license
Wikitravel, your
authors will have no direct disadvantage whatsoever.
It's just another
sentence on the article submission form. Both
licenses grant derivative
rights.
Regards,
Erik
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software