On Tue, 29 Jun 2010 17:56:39 -0500, Aaron Griffin <aaronmgriffin@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Tue, Jun 29, 2010 at 5:30 PM, Dan McGee <dpmcgee@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> On Tue, Jun 29, 2010 at 5:09 PM, Ananda Samaddar <ananda@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> On Thu, 17 Jun 2010 23:19:09 +0200 >>> Linas <linas_fi@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> >>>> I assume this ask to have GFDL & CC-BY-SA content coexist at the >>>> wiki. The existing content can only be relicensed by its authors. The >>>> GFDL 1.3 gateway >>>> expired on August 1, 2009. >>>> >>> >>> I really need an answer on this as soon as possible. For new Wiki >>> articles would it be OK to add a footer in the article stating that it >>> is licensed under a CC license and not the GFDL? Any official word on >>> this please from the Arch wiki admins or developers. If you're not >>> willing to officially allow CC licenses could the 'override' paragraph >>> I'm suggesting for new content only be all right? >> >> I honestly don't know who is going to reply to you. If you were to >> just change the license I also don't think you'd have anyone come >> after you anytime soon. >> >> Who is in charge of the wiki these days I'm not sure, but I'd try to >> get someone's attention besides mine- maybe Pierre or Aaron would be >> the right guys. > > I was also waiting for someone more knowledgeable with regards to the wiki. > > If it's my say-so you want, I don't see a problem with adding > *additional* content under CC. But switching all *existing* content to > CC might be a problem. Maybe not. Wikipedia did the same; see http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Licensing_update -- Pierre Schmitz, https://users.archlinux.de/~pierre
