Re: [Wikimedia-l] Sponsorship/donations to other organizations
Erik Moeller, 17/04/2014 19:21: Yes, this is part of the reason why I'm considering a donation to them - they're definitely in start-up mode, and we want them to survive. We can continue to handle these kinds of gifts as a very rare, discretionary thing for now (and I may want to move forward with MariaDB because a) they asked, b) they need support, c) we need them to survive), What happened in the end? Nemo and focusing (per other comments in this thread) more on how we can build systems around grants for tools that directly support content contributors. Erik ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Sponsorship/donations to other organizations
I can't recall the details of the discussion, but I think the suggestion was made for these grants to go through GAC in the future. I still think that makes sense, if GAC has the technical knoweledge to make informed decisions about these kinds of grants. Thanks, Pine On Sep 23, 2014 12:09 AM, Erik Moeller e...@wikimedia.org wrote: On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 11:42 PM, Federico Leva (Nemo) nemow...@gmail.com wrote: What happened in the end? We made a $10K donation to the MariaDB Foundation in May, and they generously elevated us to Member status for a year (normally at $50K). https://mariadb.org/en/supporters/ https://mariadb.org/en/foundation/ Cheers, Erik -- Erik Möller VP of Engineering and Product Development, Wikimedia Foundation ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] FW: To revdel (RD1) or not to revdel. That is a question....
Hoi, Googledegook, whatshallweexect they know ... UB40.. Thanks, GerardM On 22 September 2014 23:42, Jonatan Svensson Glad gladjona...@outlook.com wrote: From: gladjona...@outlook.com To: wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: To revdel (RD1) or not to revdel. That is a question Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2014 23:38:16 +0200 I have had some discussions w/ users on IRC about the need to revdel/legal obligation to revdel copyvios. If it had copyvios in it but has since been edited and rewritten, and no longer can be deleted per G12, nor revdeled per RD1 (since then it would ruin attribution, if the user had actually written something themself). How should the example below be revdeled handled? Example:Revision 1. mixed copyvio and own words by user X.Revision 2. Fixed typos by User Y.Revision 3. User Z rewrote the coied tex, left user X own words. How should this be revdeled, and how should this be atributed? (sorry for my bad English) ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Sponsorship/donations to other organizations
Yes I agree, but this means that MariaDB must be financed because it's strategical. Financing MariaDB would be possible also to keep it open/free and to assure that Mediawiki runs in an open software. But I am answering to the generic question sponsorship/donations to other organizations saying that the magic word open doesn't suppose the eligibility because there are some concepts which are functional to the open content (for instance the open data helps to improve the open content) and something which is important but less functional. What happens for the affiliated groups should happen also for the external organizations indicating some parameters of eligibility. Regards On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 12:27 PM, Gerard Meijssen gerard.meijs...@gmail.com wrote: Hoi, How do our users have the freedom to choose their own tools ? When they use MediaWiki, they are supported. MediaWiki is dependent on a stack of software that is open / free. This stack is essential and, MariaDB is part of it. Then there is free / open software used in extensions and stuff. There is software used for the management of our software, the WMF administration. It can be argued that software used on Labs may qualify but that is it. All other software is not supported by the WMF and why should it. Users may choose whatever to produce their own open content but that is far removed from what we do and might support. Yes we can produce another list. But what is the point; it does only list what we could support not what we will support nor does it provide any entitlement. Thanks, GerardM On 23 September 2014 12:01, Ilario Valdelli valde...@gmail.com wrote: I agree, but the message is that to do open content is not mandatory to have open software. Everyone can release open content generated/elaborated with his own software. And viceversa, who uses open software can use it also for close content. It's the same distinction that legally exists between software and content/data. What I have understood is that there is a larger vision of open knowledge and a closer one. The same Wikipedia's articles are not clear. Personally I consider the open knowledge derivative of the open software and a subset of the open software, but I respect the vision of the other party. For this reason I am saying that should be defined who can receive financial support. The importance of free software is not excluded (and I said that it's strategical), but the users have the freedom to choose their own tools and what can match their knowledge/expertise. Regards On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 11:42 AM, Quim Gil q...@wikimedia.org wrote: On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 10:02 AM, Ilario Valdelli valde...@gmail.com wrote: The question is that open software and open knowledge are not so close as open knowledge and open data and open content, for instance. Maybe I'm misreading the not so close part, but just in case: Free software is a subset of free knowledge, and a very important one for Wikimedia since all our content is digital. Free knowledge run by non-free software is captive, as many open initiatives dismissing this point have learned the hard way. We can't take for granted that free software will be always available and maintained either. This is why we need to take the collaboration with free software initiatives vital to us as seriously as the collaboration with other open knowledge initiatives. ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe -- Ilario Valdelli Wikimedia CH Verein zur Förderung Freien Wissens Association pour l’avancement des connaissances libre Associazione per il sostegno alla conoscenza libera Switzerland - 8008 Zürich Wikipedia: Ilario https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Ilario Skype: valdelli Facebook: Ilario Valdelli https://www.facebook.com/ivaldelli Twitter: Ilario Valdelli https://twitter.com/ilariovaldelli Linkedin: Ilario Valdelli http://www.linkedin.com/profile/view?id=6724469 Tel: +41764821371 http://www.wikimedia.ch ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe:
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Sponsorship/donations to other organizations
just to make the broad support one voice broader, i agree that supporting the ecosystem as sj called is vital. i also like the term give back as wikipedia would not be the same without this ecosystem. rupert rupert Am 23.09.2014 11:42 schrieb Quim Gil q...@wikimedia.org: On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 10:02 AM, Ilario Valdelli valde...@gmail.com wrote: The question is that open software and open knowledge are not so close as open knowledge and open data and open content, for instance. Maybe I'm misreading the not so close part, but just in case: Free software is a subset of free knowledge, and a very important one for Wikimedia since all our content is digital. Free knowledge run by non-free software is captive, as many open initiatives dismissing this point have learned the hard way. We can't take for granted that free software will be always available and maintained either. This is why we need to take the collaboration with free software initiatives vital to us as seriously as the collaboration with other open knowledge initiatives. ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
