Re: MediaWiki next steps
On Tue, Jul 22, 2025 at 01:40:03PM +0200, Guillem Jover wrote:
> Hi!
>
> [
> CCing Chris explicitly, as I'm not sure about subscription status. :)
> CCing Philipp, see a ref below.
> ]
>
> On Sun, 2025-07-20 at 13:00:20 +0200, Taavi Väänänen wrote:
> > I think the next steps are, roughly:
>
> > * Figure out licensing (see the other thread on this list) before
> > we start adding content to the wiki. Also add required things like a
> > privacy policy and a trademark notice to the footer.
>
> As I've said on the IRC channel, and to make it explicit here. While I
> think the licensing part is a very important topic, where I echo
> concerns about inbound and outbound considerations (for example I'd
> like to be able in many cases to move content from the wiki into
> packages and match their current version instead of having to have a
> mix of licenses there), and I acknowledge this might seem like a great
> time/opportunity to try to solve it and have a clean state in the new
> wiki, it also seems like a gargantuan amount of work and an artificial
> process trap (which I'm acutely aware as I have a tendency to fall into
> those :), that I fear will very easily end up stalling any progress.
>
> IMO, we have had this problem until now, so I don't see it as a big
> issue to keep having it for now (while we do a platform switch). We can
> try to reach consensus on a global default license, and then document
> that this will apply (unless specified otherwise, but still requiring
> a DFSG license), to any new content from say a specific date onwards.
>
> This then untangles any work to clean up the license situation with
> old content from any migration plan.
>
> In my mind, either blocking on this, or starting from a blank site,
> and letting individuals do the import, means we might end up with a
> mess of different perhaps more unclear base on the new wiki (if people
> will simply move things over w/o taking this into account anyway),
> than a coordinate global switch.
It sounds like there's a knot of related issues here:
* the URL structure hasn't been finalised, links are likely to break
* the license hasn't been finalised, content should be assumed disposable
* the database may be wiped (accidentally or on purpose) at any time
* it's not clear how the change of platform will affect social dynamics
* e.g. how will people feel about being contacted via Special:EmailUser?
How about we call wiki2025.d.o an alpha version where all content is CC0,
and guarantee to wipe everything before launching a beta version?
CC0 seems like a good way to discourage people from uploading anything
they feel precious about, without prejudicing the final decision.
Anyone that objects to CC0ing their work can just use Lorem ipsum.
Guaranteeing a reset before going beta also makes it easier to experiment.
For example, creating and deleting pages to try out the moderation process.
That would mean punting the final decision about migrating content
(automatically or manually) until the beta version, but would also give
lots of space to develop a migration script and find the edge cases where
it does the wrong thing.
Reply to: