Wikipedia talk:Branching support

Moved here. Old history on Meta:

(cur) (last) 06:31, 14 September 2006 Pathoschild (Talk | contribs) m (Reverted edits by Rypälehiukset to last version by 64.26.194.198)
(cur) (last) 06:30, 14 September 2006 Rypälehiukset (Talk | contribs)
(cur) (last) 17:13, 20 October 2005 64.26.194.198 (Talk)
(cur) (last) 09:33, 19 October 2005 Who (Talk | contribs) (+Category:Feature requests)
(cur) (last) 17:47, 24 September 2004 Ayman (Talk | contribs) (reverted)
(cur) (last) 17:04, 24 September 2004 Live and let Troll (Talk | contribs) (reinstating relevant comment: ideological squabbling among Wikipedia and Wikinfo developers is stalling progress)
(cur) (last) 15:26, 2 September 2004 Angela (Talk | contribs) (revert trolling)
(cur) (last) 20:37, 28 August 2004 Chainsaw (Talk | contribs) (feh)
(cur) (last) 17:06, 28 August 2004 Live and let Troll (Talk | contribs) (getwiki)
(cur) (last) 17:06, 28 August 2004 Live and let Troll (Talk | contribs) (getwiki)
(cur) (last) 08:53, 28 August 2004 137.111.13.34 (Talk)
(cur) (last) 08:49, 28 August 2004 137.111.13.34 (Talk) (Proposal for branch and merge support in Wikipedia)

Cheers, --unforg e ttableid | how's my driving? 00:44, 15 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What a horrible idea[edit]

Why would we want POV forks of Wikipedia? If you want to do that, just download the software and the database, and go merrily along your way, but since WP:NPOV is the essential pillar of Wikipedia, there's no way that POV versions of Wikipedia, under that name, would be tolerated. User:Zoe|(talk) 00:21, 16 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If you want this, you are welcome to edit the php code and create it yourself; that's the beauty of the GFDL. Per Zoe's remarks, I expect that our devs have more important things on their minds. (Radiant) 13:46, 18 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ditto per Radiant and Zoe. -- Samuel Wantman 10:00, 20 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Great idea in the spirit of open source, just bad rhetoric :)[edit]

did you really think that arguments ad Christianity will fly here? You gotta adjust the argument to the audience, that's all. Obviously making MediaWiki more broadly useful to other people would be a good idea by any standard of open source philosophy (though not necessarily by the standard of arrogant authoritarianism to which MediaWiki foundation seems to increasingly adhere). But you wouldn't get this out of them by appealing to Christian special interests, that's for sure... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.24.104.52 (talk) 21:55, 11 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]