[wp-docs] Codex and the FSF

[Scott Merrill]

Ryan Boren wrote:
> On Thu, 2005-09-22 at 08:50 +0100, Podz wrote:
> 
>>I cannot believe that a project such as WordPress is going to settle for 
>>what I can only see as a fudge.
>>Copyrights all over the place, attributions for some work, attributions 
>>missing for other work, completely unclear as to who should do what when 
>>and how. Maybe if those people who have given the most time and energy 
>>into Codex were actually consulted ? It's /their/ work.
> 
> 
> That's open source.  This is an open source project.  I'm failing to see
> the problem.  The documentation should be as free as the code.  It
> currently is because it is licensed under the GPL.  The problem with
> that is...?

There is a difference between "free to use under the terms of the GPL" 
and "copyright violation".  If someone took the WordPress code and made 
a closed, for-pay product, would you say "Oh well, them's the breaks"? 
I doubt it, because that is in violation of the license.  Moreover, it 
infringed your copyright interests in the work.

> What kind of attribution do you want?  Codex is far better attributed
> than the source code.  Each Codex contributor commits his own changes.
> Every freakin' line in the Codex is attributed giving excellent
> copyright traceability.

Yes, we can trace the copyright of each edit, assuming that no data has 
been lost from the MediaWiki database.  That is one aspect of the issue 
at hand.

The other aspect is copyright enforcement.  If someone plagarizes a 
document I've written on the Codex word-for-word and publishes it in a 
for-pay print publication, it is my responsibility, as the copyright 
holder, to bring action.  I can't do much of that, for lack of time and 
funds.  Should I stop contributing to the Codex?  Or should I stop 
bothering to license my work?  Or should I simply revoke any copyright 
interest in my contributions?

If copyright is transferred to a single entity, that entity can bring 
its resources to bear in any enforcement that may be necessary.  This 
better protects the contributions of individuals, as well as better 
protecting the project as a whole.

> Are you expecting fame and reward?  I've contributed a heaping shitload
> of time to open source projects over the last decade and in that time
> one person bought me something off my wishlist and Nuclear Moose
> interviewed me.  Oh, and I received an endless stream of pissy and petty
> emails from people who think they own me when they use what I give them
> for free.  I was also constantly implicated in the conspiracy theories
> of raving idiots and mired in the politics of those who find evidence of
> elitism in every damn decision and make calls for class struggle against
> the oppressive devs with each breath.  Such is the way it is.  Do this
> as a hobby with no expectation of getting anything out of it or do
> something else and save yourself the disappointment.

I'm truly sorry to hear that Free Software development has been such a 
bother for you.

But I think you'll agree that your position as a major contributor to a 
popular Free Software project has quite possibly opened a few doors for 
you that might not have opened otherwise.  You certainly have "name 
recognition" in many circles, and a body of work at which you can point 
in job interviews, other Free Software project discussions, etc etc.

The folks contributing documentation don't get even that intangible 
reward.  Docs are every bit as thankless as writing code, and _far_ less 
likely to generate wishlist purchases or Paypal donations.  I don't 
think there's anything wrong at all with some visible attribution in the 
Codex so that the contributors can generate for themselves the same kind 
of documented record as the developers enjoy.  This may help the 
documentors in job interviews, other Free Software projects, etc.

It's clear to me that this issue is important to some, and completely 
unimportant to others.  I don't see why a fuss is being made by those to 
whom it is unimportant.  Were this discussion happening on the hackers 
list about some hot new feature (say, WYSIWYG posting...), the folks for 
whom it was a passionate issue would trump the folks who don't care.

Or is WordPress, in fact, not an open development project, but just Matt 
and Ryan; and all of us lowly contirbutors need to defer to your 
preferences on everything?

-- 
skippy at skippy.net | http://skippy.net/

gpg --keyserver pgp.mit.edu --recv-keys 9CFA4B35
506C F8BB 17AE 8A05 0B49  3544 476A 7DEC 9CFA 4B35