Re: [Wikitech-l] Any news to update static HTML Wikipedia?
Hoi Gerard, it is indeed a huge improvement that finally the source code was made available. This has not yet came to my sight. So GPL violation does not count here. Anyway, it took a long time to actually become free. When we were trying to work with Linterweb it took us months to get some patches of the code they took from us, and the patches were actually not usable. Concerning proprietary format: Zeno was kind of proprietary, but at least it existed some documentation and DirectMedia was willing to answer questions. ZIM is completely open and freely documented, so if you don't like our implementation or you think that C++ is not the language of your choice - feel free and go ahead with your own implementation. As long as you follow the standard! Of course the file format is not fixed until good right now, so if you have suggestions you could name them on the openZIM mailinglist or file a bug at the openZIM website. What Linterweb did was just changing random thing without documentation and very bad communication towards the openZIM project team. So I do consider it as proprietary - as it is incompatible with both ZIM and Zeno and there is no willingnes to collaborate to fix this issue. Both Tommi (the openZIM main developer who has also delivered his Zeno-related code to Linterweb) and Emmanuel (from whom they took Kiwix to make it Okawix) have a long story to tell about this. As well as I have, because I am being addressed regularly by Linterweb as they still try to get code and support, but never really get into the project by telling us what they really want and how we could integrate that into openZIM. We had a Wikipedia Offline meeting in Buenos Aires and someone named Linterweb. Surprisingly for me they are also quite wellknown to the foundation and more surprisingly they have quite similar views as we have. I would love to see them using ZIM in Okawix, even if it would require some changes if they feel we had to make it more usable for them (even though I see currently no reason why it was not perfectly usable right now). Of course we invited Linterweb to our first developers meeting and two people from them actually registered (one of them was Pascal Martin, the CEO) so we book rooms for them from our project's budget, but they never showed up. A side story though, but it is an excellent example how collaboration with Linterweb is going on. Regards, Manuel -- Regards Manuel Schneider Wikimedia CH - Verein zur Förderung Freien Wissens Wikimedia CH - Association for the advancement of free knowledge www.wikimedia.ch ___ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Re: [Wikitech-l] Any news to update static HTML Wikipedia?
Hi Manuel, False accusations and the expression of willingness to cooperate usually do not go well together, so thank you for setting it right as soon as possible on this mailing list. Okawix is not violating GPL. I had a chat with one of their developers yesterday, and from what I hear from their side, as well as what I read from your side, you have a communication issue, and neither side is unwilling to cooperate. However, we are looking at a fork of a GPL licensed project. That means that from a common codebase, two different projects do not necessarily have to go into the same direction. Sometimes that is sad, sometimes that is a huge opportunity. In my experience communication issues are rarely solved in a public debate. I wish Wikimedia Switzerland as well as Linterweb the best of luck in providing the best possible offline Wikipedia experience. Cheers! Siebrand -Oorspronkelijk bericht- Van: Manuel Schneider Verzonden: donderdag 3 september 2009 8:03 [..] This has not yet came to my sight. So GPL violation does not count here. [..] As well as I have, because I am being addressed regularly by Linterweb as they still try to get code and support, but never really get into the project by telling us what they really want and how we could integrate that into openZIM. We had a Wikipedia Offline meeting in Buenos Aires and someone named Linterweb. Surprisingly for me they are also quite wellknown to the foundation and more surprisingly they have quite similar views as we have. I would love to see them using ZIM in Okawix, even if it would require some changes if they feel we had to make it more usable for them (even though I see currently no reason why it was not perfectly usable right now). [..] ___ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Re: [Wikitech-l] Any news to update static HTML Wikipedia?
Hoi, You make accusations and they fall flat. You say that the Okawix software is not GPL and it is. You say that the software is proprietary and, because of a lack of communication with YOUR project you call them proprietary... I call it preposterous. When they want to fork, they have every right to do so. Given that by your own admission YOUR code has a file format that is not fixed but you ask people to conform to your standard ??? By the definitions of the GPL it is exactly your actions that make the software you champion proprietary! Really, you should know better then spout FUD in this way. The sad thing is what you are saying is enough to land you in court because it looks to me like slander. When I read your story, I find that you insist on other people doing as you say. You may have the best intentions but you cannot compel people in this way. They are a fork, they are GPL software, they care about internationalisation and their localisation is done at translatewiki.net. At that they are ahead of you. In my opinion you owe the list an apology for your inacurate and inconsiderate accusations. Thanks, GerardM 2009/9/3 Manuel Schneider manuel.schnei...@wikimedia.ch Hoi Gerard, it is indeed a huge improvement that finally the source code was made available. This has not yet came to my sight. So GPL violation does not count here. Anyway, it took a long time to actually become free. When we were trying to work with Linterweb it took us months to get some patches of the code they took from us, and the patches were actually not usable. Concerning proprietary format: Zeno was kind of proprietary, but at least it existed some documentation and DirectMedia was willing to answer questions. ZIM is completely open and freely documented, so if you don't like our implementation or you think that C++ is not the language of your choice - feel free and go ahead with your own implementation. As long as you follow the standard! Of course the file format is not fixed until good right now, so if you have suggestions you could name them on the openZIM mailinglist or file a bug at the openZIM website. What Linterweb did was just changing random thing without documentation and very bad communication towards the openZIM project team. So I do consider it as proprietary - as it is incompatible with both ZIM and Zeno and there is no willingnes to collaborate to fix this issue. Both Tommi (the openZIM main developer who has also delivered his Zeno-related code to Linterweb) and Emmanuel (from whom they took Kiwix to make it Okawix) have a long story to tell about this. As well as I have, because I am being addressed regularly by Linterweb as they still try to get code and support, but never really get into the project by telling us what they really want and how we could integrate that into openZIM. We had a Wikipedia Offline meeting in Buenos Aires and someone named Linterweb. Surprisingly for me they are also quite wellknown to the foundation and more surprisingly they have quite similar views as we have. I would love to see them using ZIM in Okawix, even if it would require some changes if they feel we had to make it more usable for them (even though I see currently no reason why it was not perfectly usable right now). Of course we invited Linterweb to our first developers meeting and two people from them actually registered (one of them was Pascal Martin, the CEO) so we book rooms for them from our project's budget, but they never showed up. A side story though, but it is an excellent example how collaboration with Linterweb is going on. Regards, Manuel -- Regards Manuel Schneider Wikimedia CH - Verein zur Förderung Freien Wissens Wikimedia CH - Association for the advancement of free knowledge www.wikimedia.ch ___ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l ___ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Re: [Wikitech-l] Any news to update static HTML Wikipedia?
Hoi, I have read your mail and it does not address the point that I am making at all. What you write is not relevant as it does not address the central issue. The central issue is that you accuse another project of infringement on the GPL and you assert that it is proprietary software. Given that YOU stated that other implementations have to comply with what your project does, you are as a result in breach of the GPL yourself and you make what you do proprietary. The fact that you acknowledge that you did not look at the code is a long way from an apology. The way you tried to gloss over your notion of proprietary is pathetic. When you fail to find satisfactory collaboration, there are many reasons why this happened. They are not really relevant because at issue is issuing FUD and making representations of the other party that are ill considered and manifestly wrong. The best you can do is publicly apologise. This is the last time I use this mailing list for this subject. Thanks, GerardM PS I feel strongly about the proper understanding of licenses, if you want to know why see my Wikimania presentation about testing. 2009/9/3 Manuel Schneider manuel.schnei...@wikimedia.ch Hoi, I already agreed that I haven't seen the code which is available today under GPL. We are in touch with Linterweb since more than a year (Emmanuel with Kiwix even longer) and it took us several months to get useless patches - at this time Okawix was NOT GPL and NOT available in source code (but yet published and being sold on DVD). Concerning your other rants you seem not to have read or understood my mail. openZIM does not prublish offline content and does not provide reader software except it's reference implementation. It is perfectly okay for me and everyone else I know when they fork Kiwix to Okawix. Kiwix is not openZIM, though. So I can not speak for Kiwix and localisation is no matter to openZIM as well. ZIM is a standard file format used by many offline readers and ongoing efforts. There is no sense in forking a standard. As I pointed out Linterweb is unable to come up with any reasons why the keep changing things and why they are unable to just use ZIM and the library which is already there. It would make their lives easier! For the openZIM team I guess it is pretty irrelevant if Linterweb uses ZIM or not. I have pointed out that the openZIM team and Tommi tried to start a collaboration and where it went. /Manuel Am Donnerstag, 3. September 2009 09:19:42 schrieb Gerard Meijssen: Hoi, You make accusations and they fall flat. You say that the Okawix software is not GPL and it is. You say that the software is proprietary and, because of a lack of communication with YOUR project you call them proprietary... I call it preposterous. When they want to fork, they have every right to do so. Given that by your own admission YOUR code has a file format that is not fixed but you ask people to conform to your standard ??? By the definitions of the GPL it is exactly your actions that make the software you champion proprietary! Really, you should know better then spout FUD in this way. The sad thing is what you are saying is enough to land you in court because it looks to me like slander. When I read your story, I find that you insist on other people doing as you say. You may have the best intentions but you cannot compel people in this way. They are a fork, they are GPL software, they care about internationalisation and their localisation is done at translatewiki.net . At that they are ahead of you. In my opinion you owe the list an apology for your inacurate and inconsiderate accusations. Thanks, GerardM 2009/9/3 Manuel Schneider manuel.schnei...@wikimedia.ch Hoi Gerard, it is indeed a huge improvement that finally the source code was made available. This has not yet came to my sight. So GPL violation does not count here. Anyway, it took a long time to actually become free. When we were trying to work with Linterweb it took us months to get some patches of the code they took from us, and the patches were actually not usable. Concerning proprietary format: Zeno was kind of proprietary, but at least it existed some documentation and DirectMedia was willing to answer questions. ZIM is completely open and freely documented, so if you don't like our implementation or you think that C++ is not the language of your choice - feel free and go ahead with your own implementation. As long as you follow the standard! Of course the file format is not fixed until good right now, so if you have suggestions you could name them on the openZIM mailinglist or file a bug at the openZIM website. What Linterweb did was just changing random thing without documentation and very bad communication towards the openZIM project team. So I do consider it as
Re: [Wikitech-l] Any news to update static HTML Wikipedia?
Hello all, I hope that any confusion about our work, and our respect of the GPL Licence, is now lifted. If the last discord point with openZim Team is about our lack of support for the Zim format, we will attend the upcoming meeting in Germany and discuss it with them. Greets Martin Pascal tel : 02 32 40 23 69, fax : 02 32 61 45 26 gsm : 06 13 89 77 32 - Original Message - From: Gregory Maxwell gmaxw...@gmail.com To: Wikimedia developers wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org Sent: Thursday, September 03, 2009 4:45 PM Subject: Re: [Wikitech-l] Any news to update static HTML Wikipedia? On Thu, Sep 3, 2009 at 4:09 AM, Gerard Meijssengerard.meijs...@gmail.com wrote: Hoi, I have read your mail and it does not address the point that I am making at all. What you write is not relevant as it does not address the central issue. The central issue is that you accuse another project of infringement on the GPL and you assert that it is proprietary software. count Gerard, please stop harassing this person. It is a disgrace. Some months ago I went looking for the zim format and reader tool and was unable to find the source and concluded that it was proprietary. I did not know that it was based on GPLed software or I would have been making noise myself. The sourceforge project has only existed since *May*. The code has only ever been downloaded 63 times, twice by me and there are zero packaged files released. The sourceforge page does not show up high in google search. That the source is now released is a great thing, but it would have been very easy to miss. Making sure the incorrect statement were corrected is a good thing but you and Siebrand are coming across as extremely hostile. I am not even the target of your harassment and yet it makes my skin crawl. Please discontinue it. ___ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l ___ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Re: [Wikitech-l] Wiktionary API acceptable use policy
Hi, In general a small number of requests is fine, but large numbers (using the wikts as a live back-end database) is not so good. (Note that live mirrors, re-presenting WM data as part of another site are explicitly prohibited. ;-) What you should probably do is use the XML dumps from http://download.wikimedia.org/backup-index.html which at the moment (thanks to a bunch of work done after a lot of whining from us ;-) is running on a 3-4 day cycle. It is very reasonable to download each wiktionary's dump file as produced (not hard to automate). The English wikt dump is running right now as I write this. Then you can load each as it arrives into your local cache or server as desired, and use as you will. You can also get the en.wikt dumps from http://70.79.96.121/w/dump/xmlu/ updated mid-morning UTC every day. These are a bit smaller, as they only include the content pages. (Eg. you won't even find the Main page in the dump, as it is in Wiktionary: namespace.) best, Robert ___ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Re: [Wikitech-l] Wiktionary API acceptable use policy
Hi Robert, Thanks for the detailed answer. I will use the dumps. Out of curiosity, though, can you tell me where that explicit live mirror prohibition is stated? I couldn't find any controlling documents on the subject. Again, I'm referring to fetching the wiktionary mark-up source document through the API, not the rendered page. Thanks, James On Thu, Sep 3, 2009 at 9:07 AM, Robert Ullmann rlullm...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, In general a small number of requests is fine, but large numbers (using the wikts as a live back-end database) is not so good. (Note that live mirrors, re-presenting WM data as part of another site are explicitly prohibited. ;-) What you should probably do is use the XML dumps from http://download.wikimedia.org/backup-index.html which at the moment (thanks to a bunch of work done after a lot of whining from us ;-) is running on a 3-4 day cycle. It is very reasonable to download each wiktionary's dump file as produced (not hard to automate). The English wikt dump is running right now as I write this. Then you can load each as it arrives into your local cache or server as desired, and use as you will. You can also get the en.wikt dumps from http://70.79.96.121/w/dump/xmlu/ updated mid-morning UTC every day. These are a bit smaller, as they only include the content pages. (Eg. you won't even find the Main page in the dump, as it is in Wiktionary: namespace.) best, Robert ___ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l ___ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Re: [Wikitech-l] Wiktionary API acceptable use policy
On Thu, Sep 3, 2009 at 3:27 PM, James Richardjames.richard...@gmail.com wrote: Thanks for the detailed answer. I will use the dumps. Out of curiosity, though, can you tell me where that explicit live mirror prohibition is stated? I couldn't find any controlling documents on the subject. http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Live_mirrors I don't know how formal or authoritative that is. You might want to ask someone like Brion. I think the answer in practice is that nobody's going to waste time blocking you if you don't cause noticeable load, but I don't know if there's an official statement anywhere. I vaguely recall that some sites might pay Wikimedia a fee to do commercial live mirroring, but I'm not sure on that. Again, I'm referring to fetching the wiktionary mark-up source document through the API, not the rendered page. The cost of the API is roughly the same to the servers as of the rendered page, or perhaps higher (due to worse caching). It's just in a more bot-friendly format. ___ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Re: [Wikitech-l] Wiktionary API acceptable use policy
On Thu, Sep 3, 2009 at 10:26 PM, Aryeh Gregor simetrical+wikil...@gmail.comsimetrical%2bwikil...@gmail.com wrote: I don't know how formal or authoritative that is. You might want to ask someone like Brion. I think the answer in practice is that nobody's going to waste time blocking you if you don't cause noticeable load, but I don't know if there's an official statement anywhere. I vaguely recall that some sites might pay Wikimedia a fee to do commercial live mirroring, but I'm not sure on that. AFAIK one of these is spiegel.de which gets some kind of live feed, they arranged it with WM DE. Marco -- VMSoft GbR Nabburger Str. 15 81737 München Geschäftsführer: Marco Schuster, Volker Hemmert http://vmsoft-gbr.de ___ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
[Wikitech-l] PHP 5.2.11RC2 Testing
Hello! You are receiving this email because your project has been selected to take part in a new effort by the PHP QA Team to make sure that your project still works with PHP versions to-be-released. With this we hope to make sure that you are either aware of things that might break, or to make sure we don't introduce any strange regressions. With this effort we hope to build a better relationship between the PHP Team and the major projects. If you do not want to receive these heads-up emails, please reply to me personally and I will remove you from the list; but, we hope that you want to actively help us making PHP a better and more stable tool. The second release candidate of PHP 5.2.11 was just released and can be downloaded from http://downloads.php.net/ilia/, the win32 binaries are available athttp://windows.php.net/qa/. Please try this release candidate against your code and let us know if any regressions should you find any. The goal is to have 5.2.11 out within two to three weeks time, so timely testing would be extremely helpful. In case you think that other projects should also receive this kinds of emails, please let me know privately, and I will add them to the list of projects to contact. Best Regards, Ilia Alshanetsky 5.2 Release Master ___ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
