New look for haskell.org: MediaWiki

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
83 messages Options
12345
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: haskell.org Public Domain

Ashley Yakeley
Cale Gibbard wrote:

> As long as that's just the default and not required of course.

No, all contributions would be in the public domain.

> It
> might be nice to at least include some disclaimers of warranty.

Good idea.

--
Ashley Yakeley

_______________________________________________
Haskell mailing list
[hidden email]
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Re: License for haskell.org content

Ian Lynagh
In reply to this post by Ashley Yakeley
On Sun, Jan 08, 2006 at 10:16:45PM -0800, Ashley Yakeley wrote:

> In article <[hidden email]>,
>  Ian Lynagh <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> > Why not use the GPL, then?
> >
> > FWIW, the GFDL is considered non-free by Debian[1], so that would mean
> > any documentation or anything derived from the wiki couldn't be packaged
> > for Debian.
> >
> > Apart from the issue of code itself on the wiki, that other people have
> > already mentioned, presumably you'd also have licence fun if you try to
> > take surrounding explanatory text to use as haddock docs etc.
>
> Let's discuss it on the wiki:
> <http://haskell.org/haskellwiki/HaskellWiki:Community_Portal>

I don't know if there was a reason you chose my message in particular to
reply to, but I have no intention of discussing this, or anything else,
on a wiki.

Incidentally, if anyone's collecting votes/opinions, I'd vote "yes" for
any of GPL, BSD, PD, and "no" for any other licence I can think of.

(I am unlikely to directly contribute anything to the wiki ATM, though).


Thanks
Ian

_______________________________________________
Haskell mailing list
[hidden email]
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: New look for haskell.org: MediaWiki

Ashley Yakeley
In reply to this post by Sebastian Sylvan
Sebastian Sylvan wrote:

> Is there a way to typeset Haskell syntax yet?

Not yet, but someone could write an extension to do that...
<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Extending_wiki_markup>

--
Ashley Yakeley

_______________________________________________
Haskell mailing list
[hidden email]
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Re: haskell.org Public Domain

Eric Kow
In reply to this post by Ashley Yakeley
Whatever the Haskell community end up deciding, I would like to point
out that the Wikibooks project uses the GFDL.  What would greatly
simplify us wikibookians using content from the Haskell wiki are
GFDL-friendly terms, that is, one of:
  public domain
  GFDL
  creative commons [by][sa] - that's up to 4 CC licenses to choose from
(*)

If anybody suddenly feels inspired to go contribute, please see
http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Programming:Haskell

--eric

(*) the share-alike situtation may be less clear, it seems CC are
proposing a one-way compatibility with GFDL, but not sure what the news
on that is)

On 9 janv. 06, at 21:11, Ashley Yakeley wrote:
>> As long as that's just the default and not required of course.
>
> No, all contributions would be in the public domain.

--
Eric Kow                     http://www.loria.fr/~kow
PGP Key ID: 08AC04F9         Merci de corriger mon français.

_______________________________________________
Haskell mailing list
[hidden email]
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Re: License for haskell.org content

Jean-Philippe Bernardy
In reply to this post by Ian Lynagh
We could also use multi licensing. A possibility is to have, by
default, everything licensed at the same time under BSD, CC, FDL and
GPL.

(For those who wonder, this suggestion is serious /and/ sarcastic at
the same time)

Cheers,
JP.

On 1/9/06, Ian Lynagh <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On Sun, Jan 08, 2006 at 10:16:45PM -0800, Ashley Yakeley wrote:
> > In article <[hidden email]>,
> >  Ian Lynagh <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >
> > > Why not use the GPL, then?
> > >
> > > FWIW, the GFDL is considered non-free by Debian[1], so that would mean
> > > any documentation or anything derived from the wiki couldn't be packaged
> > > for Debian.
> > >
> > > Apart from the issue of code itself on the wiki, that other people have
> > > already mentioned, presumably you'd also have licence fun if you try to
> > > take surrounding explanatory text to use as haddock docs etc.
> >
> > Let's discuss it on the wiki:
> > <http://haskell.org/haskellwiki/HaskellWiki:Community_Portal>
>
> I don't know if there was a reason you chose my message in particular to
> reply to, but I have no intention of discussing this, or anything else,
> on a wiki.
>
> Incidentally, if anyone's collecting votes/opinions, I'd vote "yes" for
> any of GPL, BSD, PD, and "no" for any other licence I can think of.
>
> (I am unlikely to directly contribute anything to the wiki ATM, though).
>
>
> Thanks
> Ian
>
> _______________________________________________
> Haskell mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell
>
_______________________________________________
Haskell mailing list
[hidden email]
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Re: License for haskell.org content

ajb@spamcop.net
In reply to this post by Simon Marlow
G'day all.

Quoting Simon Marlow <[hidden email]>:

> I agree - can we please use BSD or public domain?

Creative Commons "by" might be an appropriate alternative:

    http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.5/

Cheers,
Andrew Bromage
_______________________________________________
Haskell mailing list
[hidden email]
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: haskell.org Public Domain

ajb@spamcop.net
In reply to this post by Ashley Yakeley
G'day all.

Quoting Ashley Yakeley <[hidden email]>:

> Does anyone have any objections to putting everything in the public
> domain?

No, with the proviso that individual page authors can override that on
the page itself.  There is a disincentive for authors to do this, because
their material may be deleted instead of refactored.  On the other hand,
I can think of some scenarios where this may be necessary, such as an
author republishing material from one of their scientific papers where
the publisher holds an odd copyright.

While I'd prefer public domain, obviously (it's more useful), I don't
think that retaining attribution is an unreasonable request if an author
wants it for whatever reason.  The MediaWiki Way(tm) to do attribution
is not the same as the C2 Way(tm).  It would not involve dragging
signatures unless it's specifically a discussion page.

Would it be possible to manage attribution automatically?

Cheers,
Andrew Bromage
_______________________________________________
Haskell mailing list
[hidden email]
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Re: License for haskell.org content

Jan-Willem Maessen
In reply to this post by Simon Marlow

On Jan 9, 2006, at 7:19 AM, Simon Marlow wrote:

> Chris Kuklewicz wrote:
>
>> ==============
>> Conclusion
>> It is not possible to borrow text from a GFDL'd manual and  
>> incorporate
>> it in any free software program whatsoever.  This is not a mere
>> license incompatibility.  It's not just that the GFDL is incompatible
>> with this or that free software license: it's that it is  
>> fundamentally
>> incompatible with any free software license whatsoever.  So if you
>> write a new program, and you have no commitments at all about what
>> license you want to use, saving only that it be a free license, you
>> cannot include GFDL'd text.
>> The GNU FDL, as it stands today, does not meet the Debian Free
>> Software Guidelines.  There are significant problems with the  
>> license,
>> as detailed above; and, as such, we cannot accept works licensed unde
>> the GNU FDL into our distribution.
>> ==============
>> Thus defaulting the FDL for all wiki content, including code, is a  
>> very bad idea.
>
> I agree - can we please use BSD or public domain?

I concur.  If you work at a largish company, the IP contamination  
worries can be really irritating.  Putting it all in the public  
domain ensures that people like me can read and contribute without  
trouble.

-Jan-Willem Maessen

>
> Cheers,
> Simon
>
> _______________________________________________
> Haskell mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell

_______________________________________________
Haskell mailing list
[hidden email]
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: New look for haskell.org: MediaWiki (now: Drupal)

Gour-2
In reply to this post by John Peterson-7
On Mon, 2006-01-09 at 12:51 -0500, John Peterson wrote:

> The reason that MediaWiki was installed on haskell.org is that people
> that know how to install and use MediaWiki (Ashley and others)
> volunteered to do all the work.  

That's fair.

> If we want to move up to Drupal we need someone that is willing to install, maintain,
> and transfer content.  If this is something you want to do let me know.  

Well, I consider more important to first decide resolve about "why"
rather than "how" ("When there is a will, there is a way." :-) i.e. do
we need/want CMS like Drupal or not. Then, I'm sure we can sort out how
to install it. I personally install some older Drupal on my localhost,
but I'm ready to help (both wiki & CMS has to be maintained).

By looking at Drupal's site I've noticed that DocBook export module will
be in 4.7 (atm in beta3.) and if you check
http://drupal.org/handbook/modules/book it sounds interesting (there was
lot of talk to e.g. keep DocBook format for GHC).

And, as I wrote earlier, CMS brings forums and some other features, it's
not just more powered-wiki, so let's decide if we want it...

> MediaWiki addresses many of the issues we've had with haskell.org but
> it isn't meant to be the only possible way forward.

I'm just sorry seeing that lot of time is already invested in
transferring the content...

Sincerely,
Gour


_______________________________________________
Haskell mailing list
[hidden email]
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell

signature.asc (196 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: New look for haskell.org: MediaWiki (now: Drupal)

Simon Marlow
Gour wrote:

> Well, I consider more important to first decide resolve about "why"
> rather than "how" ("When there is a will, there is a way." :-) i.e. do
> we need/want CMS like Drupal or not. Then, I'm sure we can sort out how
> to install it. I personally install some older Drupal on my localhost,
> but I'm ready to help (both wiki & CMS has to be maintained).

Personally I quite like the idea of using a CMS for haskell.org, but
there needs to be enough effort available to make it fly and keep it
flying, and I just don't see that yet.

> By looking at Drupal's site I've noticed that DocBook export module will
> be in 4.7 (atm in beta3.) and if you check
> http://drupal.org/handbook/modules/book it sounds interesting (there was
> lot of talk to e.g. keep DocBook format for GHC).
>
> And, as I wrote earlier, CMS brings forums and some other features, it's
> not just more powered-wiki, so let's decide if we want it...

I really hate forums.  I don't think I'd keep up with forums if we had
them.  It takes 10 times longer to read a forum than a newsgroup, and
since our mailing lists are gated to newsgroups on www.gmane.org, there
doesn't seem to be a need for forums too.  You can even read & post
using a web browser (though it's a bit primitive, I grant you).  Windows
users have no trouble with newsgroups, because you get a newsreader
installed by default with Windows XP (Outlook Express).  We should
provide instructions for accessing the mailing lists using a newsreader
somewhere.

Cheers,
        Simon

_______________________________________________
Haskell mailing list
[hidden email]
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Re: New look for haskell.org: MediaWiki (now: Drupal)

Gour-2
On Tue, 2006-01-10 at 17:09 +0000, Simon Marlow wrote:

> Personally I quite like the idea of using a CMS for haskell.org, but
> there needs to be enough effort available to make it fly and keep it
> flying, and I just don't see that yet.

That is very true, so let's stop taxing our brain with it ;)


> I really hate forums.  I don't think I'd keep up with forums if we had
> them.  It takes 10 times longer to read a forum than a newsgroup, and
> since our mailing lists are gated to newsgroups on www.gmane.org, there
> doesn't seem to be a need for forums too.  

My (positive) experience with the forums is that e.g. I can quickly find
solution to the problem by searching Gentoo forums, while, otoh, I
unsubscribed long ago from Gentoo mailing lists (having too much
traffic), so I'm not keeping up with the forums either, but they provide
a nice archives for a faq & answers for common problems (e.g. sticky
posts etc.)

>  You can even read & post using a web browser (though it's a bit
>  primitive, I grant you).  Windows users have no trouble with
>  newsgroups, because you get a newsreader installed by default with
>  Windows XP (Outlook Express).  We should provide instructions for
>  accessing the mailing lists using a newsreader somewhere.

That's a good idea (although, personally, i switched off my newsgroups
completely).

Sincerely,
Gour


_______________________________________________
Haskell mailing list
[hidden email]
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell

signature.asc (196 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: haskell.org Public Domain

Wolfgang Jeltsch
In reply to this post by Ashley Yakeley
Am Montag, 9. Januar 2006 19:19 schrieb Ashley Yakeley:
> [...]

> Does anyone have any objections to putting everything in the public
> domain?

There is already one important objection written on the wiki: You cannot put
your work into the public domain in every country.  For example, I live in
Germany where the concept of putting something into the public domain just
doesn't exist.  Does this mean that I won't be able to contribute to
haskell.org?  Does I have to use annotations to say that my work is licensed
under, say, a BSD-style license, while most of the other contributions are in
the public domain?

We should really find an answer to these questions before putting a lot of
effort into the wiki.

Best wishes,
Wolfgang
_______________________________________________
Haskell mailing list
[hidden email]
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: haskell.org Public Domain

Udo Stenzel
Wolfgang Jeltsch wrote:
> There is already one important objection written on the wiki: You cannot put
> your work into the public domain in every country.

So instead you license it under the conditions of "Do whatever you
please with it, but don't bug me", which is what is commonly understood
as public domain anyway and is damn well possible in Germany.

Can we please settle on a "This work may be used freely for any purpose
and comes without any expressed or implied warranty" and just _link_ to
existing works that don't fit in?  Thinking about the subject matter is
hard enough, thinking about creating licensing pitfalls is best left to
lawyers and other parasi^W specialists.


Udo.
--
"Never attribute to benevolence that which is adequately explained by
stupidity."
        -- McCaughans Razor

_______________________________________________
Haskell mailing list
[hidden email]
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell

signature.asc (196 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: haskell.org Public Domain

Ashley Yakeley
Udo Stenzel wrote:
> Can we please settle on a "This work may be used freely for any purpose
> and comes without any expressed or implied warranty" and just _link_ to
> existing works that don't fit in?  Thinking about the subject matter is
> hard enough, thinking about creating licensing pitfalls is best left to
> lawyers and other parasi^W specialists.

Should we make public domain mandatory or should we allow people to add
notices to pages for other licenses?
<http://haskell.org/haskellwiki/HaskellWiki:Community_Portal>

--
Ashley Yakeley

_______________________________________________
Haskell mailing list
[hidden email]
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Re: haskell.org Public Domain

John Meacham
On Tue, Jan 10, 2006 at 01:52:51PM -0800, Ashley Yakeley wrote:

> Udo Stenzel wrote:
> >Can we please settle on a "This work may be used freely for any purpose
> >and comes without any expressed or implied warranty" and just _link_ to
> >existing works that don't fit in?  Thinking about the subject matter is
> >hard enough, thinking about creating licensing pitfalls is best left to
> >lawyers and other parasi^W specialists.
>
> Should we make public domain mandatory or should we allow people to add
> notices to pages for other licenses?
> <http://haskell.org/haskellwiki/HaskellWiki:Community_Portal>

I would say something like 'contributions and any derivations must be
usable for any purpose by anyone in perpetuity without restriction' so
that public domain, BSD, or the GHC license are all fine. this would
also get around any issues with 'public domain' not being a well defined
term in some places and more clearly expresses the intent.

        John

--
John Meacham - ⑆repetae.net⑆john⑈
_______________________________________________
Haskell mailing list
[hidden email]
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Re: haskell.org Public Domain

Sebastian Sylvan
In reply to this post by Ashley Yakeley
On 1/10/06, Ashley Yakeley <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Udo Stenzel wrote:
> > Can we please settle on a "This work may be used freely for any purpose
> > and comes without any expressed or implied warranty" and just _link_ to
> > existing works that don't fit in?  Thinking about the subject matter is
> > hard enough, thinking about creating licensing pitfalls is best left to
> > lawyers and other parasi^W specialists.
>
> Should we make public domain mandatory or should we allow people to add
> notices to pages for other licenses?
> <http://haskell.org/haskellwiki/HaskellWiki:Community_Portal>
>

I think it's best to have "public domain" (or "I don't care what you
do with this, just don't bug me!") as the default, but allow people to
use different licenses if they want.

I really don't expect many people to take advantage of this
possibility though, but in the rare cases where someone wants to
publish something under a different license, it should be allowed.

Or we could just link it...

/S

--
Sebastian Sylvan
+46(0)736-818655
UIN: 44640862
_______________________________________________
Haskell mailing list
[hidden email]
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Re: haskell.org Public Domain

Wolfgang Jeltsch
In reply to this post by Ashley Yakeley
Am Dienstag, 10. Januar 2006 22:52 schrieb Ashley Yakeley:
> Udo Stenzel wrote:
> > Can we please settle on a "This work may be used freely for any purpose
> > and comes without any expressed or implied warranty" and just _link_ to
> > existing works that don't fit in?  Thinking about the subject matter is
> > hard enough, thinking about creating licensing pitfalls is best left to
> > lawyers and other parasi^W specialists.
>
> Should we make public domain mandatory

No, we shouldn't, since putting a work into the public domain isn't possible
in all countries.  What Udo proposed is not to put the work into the public
domain (saying: "I pass on all my rights.") but to license the work under a
very permissive license.

> or should we allow people to add notices to pages for other licenses?

Maybe we should start with forcing everything on the wiki to be licensed under
a permissive license.  We could use the one Udo proposed.  Or we could use a
BSD-style license so that we can incorporate parts of already existing
BSD-style-licensed material. BSD is also rather permissive.

If we discover that this solution is not nice we can still introduce license
annotations later.

> <http://haskell.org/haskellwiki/HaskellWiki:Community_Portal>

Best wishes,
Wolfgang
_______________________________________________
Haskell mailing list
[hidden email]
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Re: haskell.org Public Domain

Wolfgang Jeltsch
In reply to this post by John Meacham
Am Dienstag, 10. Januar 2006 23:03 schrieb John Meacham:
> [...]

> I would say something like 'contributions and any derivations must be
> usable for any purpose by anyone in perpetuity without restriction' so
> that public domain, BSD, or the GHC license are all fine.

First, the GHC license is a BSD-style license as far as I know.  Second,
BSD-style licenses have restrictions.  The restriction I remember is that
derivative works have to include the original copyright notice, the
disclaimer, etc.

If we do as you propose, different licenses could be chosen and the "user"
wouldn't know what the exact licensing terms of this or that article are.  I
think, it is better to choose one permissive license for all the content.

> [...]

>         John

Best wishes,
Wolfgang
_______________________________________________
Haskell mailing list
[hidden email]
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Re: haskell.org Public Domain

David Menendez
In reply to this post by Wolfgang Jeltsch
Wolfgang Jeltsch writes:

> Maybe we should start with forcing everything on the wiki to be
> licensed under a permissive license.  We could use the one Udo
> proposed.  Or we could use a BSD-style license so that we can
> incorporate parts of already existing BSD-style-licensed material.
> BSD is also rather permissive.

How well would BSD work with wiki content? If I see a useful bit of code
on the wiki and I want to use it, BSD requires me to acknowledge the
author's copyright, but who is the author?

As a concrete example, the old wiki has an implementation of Ralf
Hinze's nondeterminism monad. If I use that in a project, do I need to
credit Ralf? The person who typed it into the wiki? Anyone who modified
it? The wiki itself?

How much code do you need to borrow from the wiki before you need to
provide an acknowledgement?
--
David Menendez <[hidden email]> | "In this house, we obey the laws
<http://www.eyrie.org/~zednenem>      |        of thermodynamics!"
_______________________________________________
Haskell mailing list
[hidden email]
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Re: haskell.org Public Domain

John Peterson-7
I'm not sure how things work legally, but the wiki itself has all of
the authorship information in it.  Simply acknowledging that something
came from the Haskell wiki would allow anyone to identify the
underlying source given the ability to crawl around in page
histories.  I wouldn't want to have to acknowledge in any finer
detail than that myself.  I'm not sure if that is something that has
to be addressed in the license itself or not though.

   John

PS - please forgive my earlier attempt at lame humor when discussing
the wiki.  When talking about copying from the wiki I mentioned Paul
Hudak and forgot a much needed smiley after his name.  Paul is most
definitely a writer of highly original content in the Haskell world
and has absolutely no need to do anything untoward with the contents of
haskell.org.  Furthermore, the community should know that it is Paul
that has to pay for haskell.org itself - something we should all be
grateful for.

_______________________________________________
Haskell mailing list
[hidden email]
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell
12345