[05:03] <nhandler> What tag did we decide on using for tiny bugs? bitesize?
[05:14] <nhandler> Yep, https://wiki.ubuntu.com/DocumentationTeam/WhereToStart
[14:48] <nhandler> What happened to the License wiki page that is linked to in the footer on wiki.ubuntu.com?
[16:29] <j1mc> nhandler: i see a "legal" link.
[16:30] <j1mc> but don't see one for a CC license
[19:37] <Saj0577> anyone in here from the doc team and available to talk quickly?
[19:40] <cody-somerville> speak
[19:40] <cody-somerville> :)
[19:40] <cody-somerville> Just say what you wanna say
[19:47] <Saj0577> okay
[19:47] <Saj0577> i edited a wiki page that had the notice at the top saying it needed expandind can i just remove it once expanded?
[19:48] <cody-somerville> If you feel its appropriate, yes.
[19:48] <Saj0577> okay cheers just though would check.
[19:50] <cody-somerville> best to ask for forgiveness than for permission ;]
[19:51] <Saj0577> why you think that?
[19:51] <cody-somerville> Saj0577, Anything you do on the wiki can be reverted
[19:52] <cody-somerville> so if you make a mistake, its not a big deal
[19:52] <Saj0577> alright just dont want to cause loads of work for others
[20:47] <adamw> hi, ubuntu folks. can someone do a quick sanity check for me here? as far as I can tell, the ubuntu wiki has no license specific to it, so it's licensed under the terms at http://www.ubuntu.com/legal - is that right, or am I missing something?
[20:49] <Saj0577> adamw i think thats right but not 100%. its under CC license i THINK
[20:50] <adamw> Saj0577: well i sort of figured it probably would be, but i can't find such an attribution anywhere. do you know where to look?
[20:50] <Saj0577> 2mins i will have a look around for you
[20:51] <adamw> thanks a lot
[20:51] <adamw> i saw for e.g. the edubuntu wiki has a little license boxout at the bottom of each page, which is what i'd expect. but the main ubuntu one doesn't seem to.
[20:52] <Saj0577> I think that legal page is correct why is there a specifc reason your asking or something u want to do with the documents?
[20:54] <adamw> well, just thinking of using some content from the ubuntu wiki, but that would require permission from canonical, according to that license.
[20:54] <adamw> just wanted to make sure i wasn't missing something that says it's OPL or CC or GFDL or something.
[20:56] <Saj0577> what you looking to use it on/for?
[20:57] <adamw> the fedora wiki. :) i'm the adamw who works for red hat, we're talking about improving our pages on what to look for when reporting bugs in certain apps
[20:57] <adamw> someone pointed out ubuntu wiki has some great pages on that - https://wiki.ubuntu.com/DebuggingProcedures
[20:58] <adamw> so I thought, well, there's no point duplicating all that work, we may as well just re-use your stuff...but if it's not under an 'open' license we can't, really, we'll have to re-do it ourselves
[20:58] <Saj0577> yeah. I would contact Can... though because if you ask there may not be a problem but i would not bother just copying not worth the possible hassle
[20:59] <adamw> yeah, exactly. i might try and find somewhere appropriate to ask if there's a particular reason it's not under a share-able license
[20:59] <adamw> thanks for checking my sanity on this one :)
[21:00] <Saj0577> its fine. I think its not on a shared license because some people would just copy it all and claim it which is annoying for people who put in alot of hardwork (i sat doing the pages right now lol and i know i would be annoyed if someone claimed it all as there own lol)
[21:08] <adamw> sure, i don't want to argue about the reasons, just wanted to make sure whether or not i was right on the facts. thanks again
[21:10] <Saj0577> adamw yeah sure did not mean any offence or any of that ;)
[22:52] <j1mc> adamw: someone else just noticed today that the license was missing from the footer.
[22:52] <j1mc> i believe that the wiki is licensed as creative commons, but i don't recall the creative commons license type
[22:52] <j1mc> i'll send a note out to the documentation team mailing list.
[22:52] <adamw> j1mc: ah, i see - so it could be just a bug?
[22:53] <dsas_> cc-by-sa 3
[22:53] <dsas_> https://help.ubuntu.com/community/License
[22:53] <dsas_> The license is linked from the footer. Which theme are you using?
[22:53] <adamw> i see the footer now
[22:53] <adamw> i didn't see it earlier when i was asking :)
[22:53] <adamw> looks like someone's fixed it
[22:54] <adamw> no theme change, i'm not logged in, so i'm getting the default view any visitor gets
[22:54] <adamw> h, actually
[22:54] <adamw> different wiki
[22:54] <Saj0577> note:help.ubuntu.com and wiki.ubuntu.com may hae different licenses
[22:54] <adamw> i'm talking wiki.ubuntu.com , not help.ubuntu.com
[22:54] <adamw> yeah
[22:55] <adamw> the specific page in question is https://wiki.ubuntu.com/DebuggingProcedures
[22:55] <j1mc> dsas_: i don't see the link in the footer, either.
[22:55] <j1mc> i checked it while both logged in, and logged out
[22:56] <dsas_> what do you see in the footer?
[22:56] <Saj0577> when you go to edit it dont you agree to a license or something j1mc?
[22:56] <j1mc> line 1: © 2008 Canonical Ltd. Ubuntu, Kubuntu, Edubuntu, Xubuntu and Canonical are registered trademarks of Canonical Ltd.
[22:56] <j1mc> line 2: Feedback — Legal — Credits — Site Map — Powered By the MoinMoin Wiki Engine
[22:56] <j1mc> Legal just goes to Canonical's legal page. Not very specific
[22:57] <adamw> Saj0577: yeah, i was thinking of trying to sign in to make an edit and see what it says
[22:58] <Saj0577> think it asks you to agree to the license before saving so check the license :) i tried did not show the license but it did when i was editing a page earlier :S
[22:59] <dsas_> j1mc: Are you looking at wiki.ubuntu.com or help.ubuntu.com/community ?
[23:00] <j1mc> dsas_: wiki.ubuntu.com
[23:00] <j1mc> I just sent a note to the doc team ML
[23:00] <j1mc> it's weird that this topic has come up 2x on the same day
[23:01] <dsas_> j1mc: Ah, uhm, there is  no wiki wide license for that wiki
[23:01] <j1mc> dsas_: really?
[23:01] <dsas_> j1mc: Pretty sure that's the case.
[23:02] <j1mc> can you explain further?
[23:02] <dsas_> mdke tried to get it resolved once but found it more productive to drop that and just get h.u.c licensed properly
[23:02] <dsas_> There were more  people object to relicensing w.u.c
[23:02] <dsas_> as far as my memory serves
[23:02] <j1mc> so . . . what license covers w.u.c
[23:03] <j1mc> gpl?
[23:03] <dsas_> none. legally speaking each page is copyrighted by it's author I believe.
[23:03] <dsas_> unless stated otherwise.
[23:03] <j1mc> wtf
[23:04] <Saj0577> that dont seem too logical
[23:04] <dsas_> mdke will likely remember and know better than I though
[23:04] <j1mc> ok - well, i put the note out to the ML. we'll see what people say
[23:04] <j1mc> what if someone forgets to indicate what license they've selected for their content?
[23:04] <j1mc> that's so lame
[23:06] <dsas_> well, I think most people aren't going to object if you do something with the content. Most of the content on there should just be feature specifications, team organisation etc
[23:07] <dsas_> documentation belongs on help.ubuntu.com/community which is licensed.