[Scribus] Re: WikiWiki?

[Maciej Hanski]

On Mon, 31 Jan 2005 19:00:28 +0100
Craig Bradney <cbradney at zip.com.au> wrote:

> On Monday 31 January 2005 17:16, Maciej Hanski wrote:
> > On Sun, 16 Jan 2005 17:18:19 +0100
> >
> > In particular, I was struck by the quality of the Gentoo
> > documentation, both the official and the unofficial. Speaking of the
> > latter, the GNU FDL'd, multilingual and maintained by Gentoo users
> > Gentoo-Portage Wiki http://gentoo-wiki.com/Main_Page is a unique
> > treasury of knowledge -- I wonder, if we could have something like
> > that for the Scribus community. To start with, we could use some of
> > the most interesting mails from this list for the initial "Tips &
> > Tricks" and "Howtos" -- there have been quite a few interesting
> > exchanges of views here that could be easily transformed into
> > suitable docs.
> >
> > What do you think of that?
> 
> Yes, I plan to set up a public wiki with MediaWiki on the Scribus
> server soon.
> 
> Craig
> 

Now, this is really a great piece of news! Will it be possible to have
it multilingual (at least bilingual :) from the beginning?


On Mon, 31 Jan 2005 18:09:56 +0100
"Thomas R. Koll" <tomk32 at gmx.de> wrote:

> Yeah, a wiki would be nice, if you need someone to maintain it, I'm
> quite experienced with Mediawiki.
> About the license, the GNU FDL is quite crappy, at Wikipedia it's a
> source of long discussions and the CC licences are usefuller.
> 
> ciao, tom

Tom, could you explain in a few words, what makes GNU FDL so "crappy" in
comparison to Creative Commons? 

I  went through some Creative Common pages and what looks to me  at
first glance as the biggest advantage, is, that's so easy to understand
and to customize to ones needs. The  Creative Commons Attribution
License http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/ seems to be pretty
similar to GNU FDL -- I could imagine using it as a "default" licence
for all Scribus Wiki contents, and leaving it to every Scribus Wiki
author  to choose instead for their work the "Creative Commons
Attribution-NonCommercial License"
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/2.0/, which prohibits the
commercial use without authors approval . Does it sound reasonable? 


br 
Maciej