Wiki submission license, credits, and policy.

Jonathan Jesse jjesse at iserv.net
Tue Nov 8 17:46:08 UTC 2005


On Tuesday 08 November 2005 12:22, Matthew East wrote:
> On Wed, 2005-11-09 at 03:15 +1100, Jamie Jones wrote:
> > When looking into why my and other authors, authorship credits were
> > removed from a document, I was told that it isn't appropriate to put
> > authorship credits on the documents. Having not been aware of this, I'd
> > contributed documents on the understanding that the wiki in question
> > (edubuntu) was governed by
> > http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.5/ as listed at the bottom
> > here http://wiki.edubuntu.org/EdubuntuWiki . My understanding of the
> > linked license was that it was by attribution, which to me means leaving
> > the authorship credits intact unless substantial changes to the content
> > have been made.
>
> I'm going to read the licences and do some research on this. Given that
> I am a lawyer, it would make sense that I give some kind of view on
> this, however I don't feel comfortable doing so until I've researched a
> little.
>
> My initial "hunch" is to agree with Corey that the presence of the
> revision history contained within the page info is sufficient to comply
> with the licence(s).
>
> Obviously from a practical point of view it is desirable that the wiki
> contains documentation which isn't cluttered with author attribution,
> especially given the "wiki philosophy" that everyone can edit and
> improve. If my hunch is wrong, then we'll have to think about what
> licence we want on the wiki.
>
> In the meantime, thanks for your contributions, and I'm sorry that you
> feel any confusion over the licensing situation is preventing you from
> contributing further!
>
> Matt

One thing that the Kubuntu docs (per Riddell) did was to strip the revision 
history out of anything published.  They can be seen in the svn repo and 
through the history kept by svn.  By doing so it makes the doc look less 
cluttered and at least to me, more professional.  But we can add it back in 
if we are violating the license.




More information about the ubuntu-doc mailing list