Sanity in IT terms and practicality in regulatory terms don't always go hand in hand. Transporting an image dump on a hard drive might well be the most practical way to move that much data - though it should be encrypted at least whilst in transit. But forking doesn't sound to me a good reason to disclose deleted edits. Or for that matter account passwords. So that drive would need to be an extract of the material covered in the license.
WereSpielChequers ------------------------------ > > Message: 9 > Date: Sat, 17 Sep 2011 10:06:08 -0400 > From: MZMcBride <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] 86% of german users disagree with the > introduction of the personal image filter > To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List > <[email protected]> > Message-ID: <[email protected]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" > > David Gerard wrote: > > On 17 September 2011 10:16, John Vandenberg <[email protected]> wrote: > >> On Sat, Sep 17, 2011 at 7:11 PM, David Gerard <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > >>> We need people to try the technical basics of a fork, i.e. taking an > >>> en:wp dump, an images dump, .. > > > >> Is there an images dump? > > > > If there isn't, there should be. > > > > (I'm now trying to work out how to get the images without using up all > > my bandwidth allowances ever.) > > It's easy enough to get a VPS with unlimited bandwidth. It's a few > terabytes > of data, though, depending on what you're talking about. Thumbnails, > current > images, older versions of images, deleted images, math renderings, etc. The > sanest solution probably involves mailing a hard drive to someone and then > having them mail it back. > > MZMcBride > > > > _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
