GFDL 1.3

[Alex Hudson]

Ciaran O'Riordan wrote:
> Many organisations publish modified versions of Wikipedia, so it's useful
> for them to be able to be able to move their version to cc-by-sa instead of
> having to drop their version, take a fresh copy of Wikipedia after the
> (possible) change of licence, and redo their changes.  Just a guess.
>   

So my post-2009 scenario is going to rear its head with forks of 
Wikipedia that are going to be potentially incompatible - people still 
on GFDL at that point would be creating modifications which can't be 
merged back.

Going through the Wikimedia discussion, the whole idea of a mostly 
dual-licensed but somewhat CC-BY-SA-only Wikipedia sounded pretty bad. 
Having forks would be worse, though.

I have to say, I'm really struggling with this. The only "bright side" I 
see to this is that the potential damage is mostly limited in scope and 
time...

Cheers,

Alex.