> Message: 4 > Date: Wed, 2 Feb 2011 12:08:25 +0100 > From: Petr Kadlec <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [Commons-l] Proposal for an > allrightsreserved.wikimedia.org website > To: Wikimedia Commons Discussion List <[email protected]> > Message-ID: > <[email protected]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 > > On 1 February 2011 22:27, Blurpeace <[email protected]> wrote: > > so we can remove > > two sentences from project policy? > > Note that another slight disadvantage of the current state of affairs > is that sites using InstantCommons (e.g. the OpenStreetMap wiki) are > currently able to use CopyrightByWikimedia images (well, more than > just ?able to use?, they can do that inadvertently; they cannot simply > distinguish the non-free files from the free rest). > > -- [[cs:User:Mormegil | Petr Kadlec]]
Whats being proposed here doesn't directly fix that, since if you setup multiple foreign repositories (at least how the code currently work), other people using you as a forign repository can get to foreign files through you. However, it'd probably make the coding required to exclude such files significantly easier. Someone else said: >But. there's no reason why the two should be technically separated. It's >already been practically divided by categories. It's not considered >unnecessary faff just by techs; any pragmatic person would agree. Has any of the ops people actually said this would be annoying or in anyway difficult to set up. I know things get much more complicated when you're dealing with 800 wikis, one of which is in the top 6 (or whatever) sites of the internet, but still - this looks like about 5 extra lines in one config file (assuming meta is used so a new wiki isn't set up). The only complicated bit might be make global image links work (but then again, there may be complications i just don't see). -bawolff _______________________________________________ Commons-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l
