[AktiviX-discuss] Re: GPL for the AktiviX wiki?

[Chris]

Hi

On Wed 21-Jul-2004 at 05:04:32PM +0100, MJ Ray wrote:
> On 2004-07-21 16:37:02 +0100 mp at fsc.cc wrote:
> 
> > (i) I am not sure that the AktiviX Wiki is *mainly*
> > about software at all, is it?
> 
> That was my impression from looking at it. I could be
> wrong.

The sub title on every page, "AktiviX, Free software for a
Free world." does give the impression that this is the
main topic, if it isn't then what is?

> > (ii) From my perspective it is an act of severely
> > muddling issues to claim that "all information that it
> > is residing in a computer is *software*".
> 
> Most of the claims otherwise seem to be muddling the
> ideas of form and function. Here's a quote I like about
> why: "We can't depend for the long run on distinguishing
> one bitstream from another in order to figure out which
> rules apply." Eben Moglen, FSF's general counsel, in
> "Anarchism Triumphant: Free Software and the Death of
> Copyright"
> http://www.firstmonday.dk/issues/issue4_8/moglen/index.html

OK, how about a concrete example of this -- consider how
much the content of the wiki is tied up with the software
running it.

The other night I was chatting on the #aktivix channel
about how to back up the wiki content. The easiest way is
to do a MySQL dump of the tables that are needed to
reproduce the site and then to make these availabe to be
mirrored elswhere. This is what the Wikipedia does. 

In this MySQL dump there is not only the content of all
the pages but also template strings that contain vairables
[1] and some of these have been customised for the site.
The apache config and other things like the CSS have all
been documented on the wiki [2] so they do end up being
included in the MySQL dump. But uploaded files and their
directory structure are not so these would have to be
rolled up into a tar ball.

So, once a backup has been done and there happens to be a
hard disk failure on the server how to put the site back
together? There isn't any software other than MediaWiki
(well perhaps ones of the forks has retained database
compatability) that could be easily used to get a new
version of the site up -- it's not only the page content
it's the URIs of pages and the history that one would want
preserved. 

So the line between content and code _is_ blurred.. and I
don't see how trying to draw a line between these things
helps us either?

Two reasons why I like the idea of using the GPL are:

1. We would be "putting our money where out mouths are",
   "doing as we preach" etc, blah... you know what I
   mean...

2. It would mean that there wouldn't be a problem with,
   for example, Blag including some content from the site
   in the disto -- there could be an issue with this if
   the content has a Creative Commons no-commercial use
   clause.

> > This is the line that Debian has taken, I understand,
> > but I think it is nonsense.  Text and literature is
> > text and literature, and NOT software, IMHO.
> 
> Text can be software, the same as text can be ink on
> paper. It's just a form, an instance.

Indeed...

> > I just dont get this idea at all....... in an even
> > more digital future everything is software then?
> 
> I'm not sure. Probably more things will be available as
> software. This is part of why I think it is important to
> request the same freedoms to use, improve, redistribute
> and distribute improvements, even when software
> producers try to tell us that discrimination is fair,
> whether against groups of people or fields of use.

The lines between the designs of things and the software
that things are designed using is blured already and I
think having free designs of things is going to be very
important in the near future...

> > And finally: I think that the GPL is a good thing for
> > software, but I don#t see how it is *GOOD* for the GPL
> > to be extended directly to other domains...

Hmm, this reminds me of what Stallman says when asked
about things other than software... 

I think that the manner in which Free software is produced
is something that can and should be spread to other
realms, the thing to spead being the new mode of
production.

Text produced on a wiki, like the Wikipedia does represent
this mode of production being applied to other areas.

> > just am i am not sure that it is a good idea to extend
> > otehr domains into software/GPL.

Well I think one role that AktiviX can proform, in
addition to trying to introduce Free software to activists
is to introduce other activists to Free software people --
there is stuff both parties can learn. Look at the battle
against software patents in Europe for an example of
this... 

Chris

[1] https://wiki.aktivix.org/MediaWiki:All_messages 

[2] https://wiki.aktivix.org/AktiviX:MediaWiki

-- 
Aktivix -- Free Software for a Free World