> There's a simple question: Can you run all key services relevant to Wikimedia using only free/open software?
The question of "key service" is very interesting. If something were considered to be a key service, I would definately say that it should be managed by Wikimedia and, for practical reasons, rely only on free software (as far as possible). But is a Q&A facility a "key service"? Or is it something that, for example, a community like exists on Stack Exchange can do just as well - maybe even better? The other things below are also very interesting and spot on. Oliver On 22 July 2011 09:44, Erik Moeller <[email protected]> wrote: > On Fri, Jul 22, 2011 at 1:25 AM, Oliver Moran <[email protected]> > wrote: > > The issues you raise about open-source vs. proprietary software, that's > an > > open-source vs. proprietary software debate - and one that sounds like it > is > > on the ideological edge of that arena. As a software engineer who > develops > > proprietary software, I can almost guarantee that a whole bunch of > > open-source software (e.g. MIT licenced) is in the Stack Exchange > software. > > Indeed, just by looking at their web source its possible to see proof of > > that. Because of this, the matter of the benefits of open source software > > vs. the proprietary software is a theoretical one. In modern practise, > the > > two cannot be so cleanly separated. > > There's a simple question: Can you run all key services relevant to > Wikimedia using only free/open software? If the answer is no, we're > losing something very important, which isn't merely about sticking to > our guns, but about ensuring the survivability of what we're doing for > not just years, but decades to come. > > I think the idea of a dedicated Q/A site is an interesting one -- but > not necessarily the best way to address the underlying problem. We're > test-deploying a small feature for microfeedback (including requests > for help) from new users next week. The initial deployment is designed > to assess the signal/noise ratio of such microfeedback & make a > decision about whether to iterate further on that model. You can read > a bit more here: > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:VPT#Quick_Feedback_on_Editing_Experience:_New_Editors > > Such systems could potentially be expanded further, as can systems > like the new Article Feedback tool, to carefully manage, curate and > respond to a wide variety of subjective information flows from > questions to comments to reviews. In the meantime, StackOverflow, > Quora & friends are spending very substantial effort improving their > editing features, e.g.: > http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2011/07/faster-edits-with-inline-editing/ > > IMO the convergence of curation and collaboration systems for > subjective & objective information flows is a pretty natural > development and one which we shouldn't be afraid of. > -- > Erik Möller > Deputy Director, Wikimedia Foundation > > Support Free Knowledge: http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Donate > > _______________________________________________ > foundation-l mailing list > [email protected] > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l > _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
