Subject:
Re: Re: Linuxquestions.org wiki
From:
####@####.####
Date:
4 Sep 2004 23:21:17 -0000
Message-Id: <3ds8t6$6667be@mxip20a.cluster1.charter.net>
(I aplogize if I double-post. Webmail timed out.)
Dave ####@####.####
> I'm at a loss here. Why would you want to modify a document to that point?
>
> If it's just to meet the standards of 'wiki' in that it can be changed.
> Then my answer is no, you do not have permission to use my HOWTO.
>
> As I understand this, anyone, however knowledgeable or unknowledgeable
> can make changes to a document and thereby spread incorrect information.
>
First off, could I ask what document(s) you have hosted at the TLDP? It would help this discussion if I knew what license you were under. Also, I would need to know it if I do convince you to let us do this. On the other hand, if you do decide to refuse permission, I need to take you off my list of people to contact. (Or rather, list of documents that I need to contact the authors of.)
Chances are, if you have a document hosted at the LDP, you have it licensed under a license that allow modifications. If I wanted to, I could take the document, make any modifications I want (as long as I abide by the terms of the license) and host it myself. But, if the license is copyleft, I can't rerelease it under a different license without further permission from you. The LQwiki can use material that is licensed in a way that permits modifications, but not if the license is a copyleft one, like the GPL or GFDL. This is because all work at the LQwiki is required to be placed under the Creative Commons.
The case I cited, where your document is modified to the point where it no longer contains any material that is recognizably yours, is an extreme one. What is far more likely to happen is that we change the format so it matches our manual of style. Then we hyperlink to other articles in our wiki's database. From there, additional information would be added. Over time, much would change, but chances are, pieces of your work would still be in there for years to come. The point is, once you release your work under a license that permits modifications, it no longer belongs entirely to you but to the community.
Consider Linux. Since Linus licenses Linux under the GPL, anybody can fork it and make their own modifications. Since Linus still holds trademark to Linus, he could disavow it, but he can't stop them from distributing or modifying it, as long as they abide by the terms of the GPL. I could take the Linux kernel, modify it to where it turns your computer to molten slag, and Linus couldn't do anything about it except for to force me to call it "Danix".
But the chances of somebody screwing up that badly are very slim. You are right in that any Joe Blow can come in an modify a wiki article, regardless of their talent. But anybody else can come in a fix their mistakes. From earlier comments in this thread, I've gathered that the LDP uses a formal review process. Before a document is allowed to be hosted on TLDP, it is edited by a board of experienced editors, right? But they are human, and mistakes can still make it through the process.
I would be very surprised if more than five people review a document before it is accepted. But in a wiki, chance are that five people *every day* read the document, and every one of them can fix any mistakes with less effort than it takes to send this email. They might not be as expert as the LDP's review board, but there are a *lot* of them, and many of them are experts. It takes a very subtle bug to make it through this constant scrutiny. (Catching *those* bugs is part of the 10% of work that only experts can do.) The end result is that, on average, a mature wiki has as good or better quality control than a document that has gone through a conventional review process.
But mistakes do happen. This is why we have a disclaimer at the wiki that essential says that this information is strictly as is. Most of the documents hosted at the LDP have a similar disclaimer. It might help to think of the LQwiki as the CVS daylies version of the document in question. An article could be abstracted from the wiki, modified so that it is once again a stand-alone document, and then put through the LDP's review process. The only limitation would be that the resulting document would have to licensed under the Creative Commons. (Copyleft again.)
While wikis can and do produce original material from scratch, where they really shine is by constantly editing and adding new information to existing works. This is why I'm looking for existing Linux documentation that we can put into our wiki. While we can and do link to the original documents, it's not the same as actually being able to edit and modify the document itself.
I understand that the way wikis work can be counter-intuitive. If you have any doubts, I suggest you go to the Wikipedia and compare their work to a encyclopedia produced by conventional methods. The process by which wikis function is exactly the same process that lets Open Source software (which is largely created by students and hobbyists) compete against, and largely beat, proprietary software done by small teams of highly skilled professionals.
