The Mediawiki 1.18 image rotation bug on Commons and on all Wikimedia projects
1 - Bug or feature ? It is a bug.
2 - The human bug
3 - The technical bug
4 - Unexhaustive list of related talks
1 - Bug or feature ? It is a bug.
Look at
On Tue, Dec 13, 2011 at 12:36 AM, Teofilo teofilow...@gmail.com wrote:
1 - Bug or feature ? It is a bug.
... snip ...
It is somehow intentional, because it seems that the devs have
suddenly decided that the exif orientation tag should be taken into
account, while in the past users used had to
The unrepentant attitude expressed above by K. Peachey increases the
need for clear excuses from the Wikimedia Foundation, expressing
clearly that something has gone wrong in the decision process, and
that the people who think the relationship between users-community and
developers the way K.
On 12 December 2011 15:26, K. Peachey p858sn...@gmail.com wrote:
It's been a requested feature for a while, Someone finally got around
to writing it (I believe it needed the Improved metadata handling
backend first) and implementing it, It wasn't a sudden oh lets write
this and enable it in
Le 11 décembre 2011 19:02, MZMcBride z...@mzmcbride.com a écrit :
Hi.
The Terms of use rewrite is starting to wind down. The current draft is
here: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Terms_of_use.
From the point of view of Continental Europe, where creators enjoy
advanced copyright laws which
For some unexplained reasons, the whole contents of my message is not
showing at
http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/foundation-l/2011-December/070807.html
. Here is another copy again:
Le 12 décembre 2011 17:14, Teofilo teofilow...@gmail.com a écrit :
Le 11 décembre 2011 19:02, MZMcBride
On 12 December 2011 16:18, Teofilo teofilow...@gmail.com wrote:
For some unexplained reasons, the whole contents of my message is not
showing at
http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/foundation-l/2011-December/070807.html
. Here is another copy again:
It came to the list, but the archiving
I am unable to find precise answers to your questions. But the scope
of the phenomenon can be somehow understood with the following data
which hint that today, the demand for rotation service has increased
about 56-fold compared to June 2011. But I am unable to say how long
the present high demand
On 12 December 2011 15:26, K. Peachey p858sn...@gmail.com wrote:
Nothing much went wrong in the planning of this feature,
Really?!
How is not having realised that this new feature would break 1000's of
images and preventing it not something going wrong in the planning?
(And yes, I mean break -
On Mon, Dec 12, 2011 at 8:14 AM, Teofilo teofilow...@gmail.com wrote:
Perhaps the WMF should not have relied on a US lawyer alone. Perhaps a
team associating a US lawyer with a continental Europe lawyer would
have been better.
Your notion that we just had some American lawyer with no
On Mon, Dec 12, 2011 at 8:14 AM, Teofilo teofilow...@gmail.com wrote:
Perhaps the WMF should not have relied on a US lawyer alone. Perhaps a
team associating a US lawyer with a continental Europe lawyer would
have been better.
Your notion that we just had some American lawyer with no
On Mon, Dec 12, 2011 at 7:55 AM, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote:
* How many existing uploads, used on the wikis, were previously
wrongly rotated and were fixed by the feature?
* How many existing uploads, used on the wikis, were previously
correctly rotated and were messed up by the
@Teofilo. Thanks for your comments. The licensing and attribution
requirements in the proposed Terms of
usehttp://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Terms_of_use#7._Licensing_of_Contentare
intended to be exactly the same as the current Terms
of use http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Terms_of_use. If
Speaking off the record and in my personal capacity - fuckin' A. Thank you
for being the one sane voice :p
On Sunday, 11 December 2011, Renata St renataw...@gmail.com wrote:
The problem is that the research committee made only a token effort
at finding or following relevant onwiki policy or
Is swearing acceptable on this email list? If so, I will unsubscribe
as I would prefer not to to be surprised by offensive language in my
mail box.
Fae
On 12 December 2011 18:59, Oliver Keyes oke...@wikimedia.org wrote:
Speaking off the record and in my personal capacity - fuckin' A. Thank you
On 12 December 2011 18:18, Erik Moeller e...@wikimedia.org wrote:
On Mon, Dec 12, 2011 at 7:55 AM, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote:
* How many existing uploads, used on the wikis, were previously
wrongly rotated and were fixed by the feature?
* How many existing uploads, used on the
It's been a requested feature for a while, Someone finally
got around to writing it
Who has asked for such a silly feature?
Every uploader sees the image he/she is uploading and has made the necessary
rotation beforehand.
But perhaps the same people that organized the Indian desaster or
Would you care to explain anything you're talking about?
I don't see anything in the Licensing section that mentions anything
about U.S. copyright law. It says the content is licensed under the GFDL
and CC-BY-SA, and the Attribution section just reflects the standard
practices for those
I forgot humiliate. Sorry.
Ryan Kaldari
On 12/12/11 8:14 AM, Teofilo wrote:
Le 11 décembre 2011 19:02, MZMcBridez...@mzmcbride.com a écrit :
Hi.
The Terms of use rewrite is starting to wind down. The current draft is
here:https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Terms_of_use.
From the point of
On Mon, Dec 12, 2011 at 11:14 AM, Teofilo teofilow...@gmail.com wrote:
Le 11 décembre 2011 19:02, MZMcBride z...@mzmcbride.com a écrit :
Hi.
The Terms of use rewrite is starting to wind down. The current draft is
here: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Terms_of_use.
From the point of
On Mon, Dec 12, 2011 at 8:25 PM, Ryan Kaldari rkald...@wikimedia.org wrote:
Would you care to explain anything you're talking about?
I don't see anything in the Licensing section that mentions anything
about U.S. copyright law. It says the content is licensed under the GFDL
and CC-BY-SA, and
On 12/12/2011 3:02 PM, Andre Engels wrote:
I think what he means is that under most European copyright regimes,
an author has far-reaching personality rights, which include the right
to have the work accredited to them whenever it is republished. The
terms of use, in his feeling, hollow out
On 12 December 2011 18:18, Erik Moeller e...@wikimedia.org wrote:
Technically, nothing was messed up by the feature. Rather, the
software previously did not take EXIF rotation into account, and some
images had incorrect EXIF rotation information to begin with. Those
images are now shown in an
That's the whole point of free licenses—you're giving up some of your
rights to your work. This doesn't have anything to do with European vs.
American copyright law.
I checked the wording in the existing terms of service and it's exactly
the same.
Ryan Kaldari
On 12/12/11 12:02 PM, Andre
On 12 December 2011 20:05, Marc A. Pelletier m...@uberbox.org wrote:
On 12/12/2011 3:02 PM, Andre Engels wrote:
I think what he means is that under most European copyright regimes,
an author has far-reaching personality rights, which include the right
to have the work accredited to them
2011/12/12 Möller, Carsten c.moel...@wmco.de:
It's been a requested feature for a while, Someone finally
got around to writing it
Who has asked for such a silly feature?
Many people indeed. I wanted that since I had my first camera with
rotation exif data.
Every uploader sees the image
On Mon, Dec 12, 2011 at 11:14 AM, Teofilo teofilow...@gmail.com wrote:
Le 11 décembre 2011 19:02, MZMcBride z...@mzmcbride.com a écrit :
Hi.
The Terms of use rewrite is starting to wind down. The current draft is
here: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Terms_of_use.
From the point of
On 12 December 2011 19:22, Möller, Carsten c.moel...@wmco.de wrote:
It's been a requested feature for a while, Someone finally
got around to writing it
Who has asked for such a silly feature?
Every uploader sees the image he/she is uploading and has made the necessary
rotation
I suppose we could add a disclaimer saying that the Terms of Use do not
affect the editor's moral rights, although this would be a bit redundant
since the CC-BY-SA license already states this.
Ryan Kaldari
On 12/12/11 12:42 PM, Maggie Dennis wrote:
On Mon, Dec 12, 2011 at 11:14 AM,
On Mon, Dec 12, 2011 at 06:59:24PM +, Oliver Keyes wrote:
On Sunday, 11 December 2011, Renata St renataw...@gmail.com wrote:
as per WIARM.
As I said, analyze and nitpick things to death. Does any of that above *
really* matter?
Speaking off the record and in my personal capacity -
ANDDD HERE WE GO
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Jimbo_Wales#Request_for_Comment:_SOPA_and_a_strike
2011/10/27 Domas Mituzas midom.li...@gmail.com
Hi!
we recently did some practice on italian wikipedia, are we going to
protest IP legislation in US by taking down English
+ support!
_
MateusNobre
MetalBrasil on Wikimedia projects
(+55) 85 88393509
30440865
From: emi...@gmail.com
Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2011 23:40:06 +0100
To: foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] just wondering, are we going to take down
From: David Gerard dger...@gmail.com
On 12 December 2011 18:18, Erik Moeller e...@wikimedia.org wrote:
Technically, nothing was messed up by the feature. Rather, the
software previously did not take EXIF rotation into account, and some
images had incorrect EXIF rotation information to
Kim,
One thing that confuses me. On the Foundation-l list, why do you
insist on peppering your comments with English Wikipedia alphabet soup
and references to local project policy? A pretty large proportion of
the readers of this list have no interest in such pages, and no
knowledge of what you
On Mon, Dec 12, 2011 at 07:01:58PM -0500, Nathan wrote:
Kim,
One thing that confuses me. On the Foundation-l list, why do you
insist on peppering your comments with English Wikipedia alphabet soup
and references to local project policy? A pretty large proportion of
the readers of this list
On Mon, Dec 12, 2011 at 12:12 PM, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote:
What was messed up was the
presentation of images that were already displayed correctly.
Well, technically, they were displayed incorrectly. ;-) The image told
the software Please rotate me, and the software didn't. But
Hi all,
Just a quick announcement that this Thursday, December 15th, we'll have an
IRC office hours with Sue Gardner at 18:00 UTC. Time conversion links and
more on in the usual place on Meta.[1] We haven't set a topic yet, though
with the fundraiser, questions about the SOPA bill in the U.S.,
On Mon, Dec 12, 2011 at 7:48 PM, Erik Moeller e...@wikimedia.org wrote:
The best place for further discussion of this issue is:
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons_talk:Rotation
And, lots more discussions here as well:
A thought to those posting in this thread (especially some of the
earlier posts):
What effect would a less aggressive tone have had? Would you have
been more likely to convince your audience? less likely to alienate
people?
This list often has too high a heat:light ratio. You can help fix
One more vote from me for a collaborative Wikipedia hosting: In order to future
proof Wikimedia, an even more distributed architecture is needed. This would
allow another way to contribute to the Wikimedia effort: the donation of
technical resources.
This idea is by no means a new idea, see
40 matches
Mail list logo
