Is there any reason you can't overwrite the message mobile-frontend-footer-license ?

Yes, the expectation that MobileFrontend will just show the same value that $wgRightsText has. :)

The license of the content will be always the same in desktop and mobile.

(In reply to comment #1)

Is there any reason you can't overwrite the message
mobile-frontend-footer-license ?

Because you need to override it in every language possible, compare https://en.m.wikinews.org/wiki/Main_Page vs. https://en.m.wikinews.org/wiki/Main_Page?uselang=fr

Max mentioned that he had a fix for this, but I don't know the details.

(In reply to comment #4)

Max mentioned that he had a fix for this, but I don't know the details.

https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/83104 but it's just a part of a solution - ideally we might want to use the same text. What's preventing us? Desktop links are less of a concern now that we have mobile redirection on wikimediafoundation.org, however for example http://m.wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Privacy_policy still looks ugly. If we fixed all these technical concerns I think product can work with legal on a solution that we programmers can implement.

Change 84465 had a related patch set uploaded by Kaldari:
Un-hardcode footer license message

https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/84465

Change 84465 merged by jenkins-bot:
Un-hardcode footer license message

https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/84465

Reopening.

Apparently MobileFrontend and [[Special:allmessages]] both do not follow redirects and use the content from MW core which was written at least 7 years ago. (hard to follow the blame because there were reformattings and moves from one file name to another)

Vector and MonoBook both follow redirects and so they use the custom WMF message.

Compare http://web.archive.org/web/20130907214711/http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_Page vs. http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_Page

Bumping priority because I think legal would object to the current wording. ("Content" vs. "Text". but I guess it can wait until morning.)

Someone pinged me this afternoon and I'm looking at it, but I had a few questions. The links to the archive help answer one of those, so thanks!

For the record in the bug, old format:

Text is available under CC BY-SA 3.0; additional terms may apply.

New format:

Content is available under Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 Unported.

And I'll take assignment, but who should I reassign to when I'm done? Max?

(In reply to comment #10)

And I'll take assignment, but who should I reassign to when I'm done? Max?

Assign it to Kennan and he can schedule it in an upcoming sprint.

(In reply to comment #8)
to clarify, that's mostly not from reading the code but just what I saw when looking at the 3 different interfaces (Vector/MonoBook/Mobile) and [[Special:AllMessages]]. (so maybe it's some other component doing the redirect resolution instead of the skin)

The "redirect" is actually a hook that we don't currently support on the mobile side. It's actually not supported on purpose sine we don't want the paragraph-long notice that currently shows up on en.wiki desktop being shown on mobile. Once I hear back from Luis on the legal requirements for the notice, we can decide how to move forward on improving things further.

Did Change-Id: I0440ecd33e253fdaf77179b855db6cdd4f355935 fix this?

No, that fix wasn't related. But the following are:

https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/#/c/84558/
https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/#/c/85391/

Should be fixed now and deployed tomorrow.

I just realized that the hardcoded license still shows up in the mobile edit preview page. See what http://espiral.org footer still says (1.22wmf22 - CC0 license):

[CC-by-sa logo]] By clicking "Save", you agree to our Terms of Use and agree to release your text under the CC BY-SA 3.0 License and GFDL.

jgonera wrote:

Also see bug 56639.

This bug was about footer so I believe it should remain closed. Let's work on the other bug 56639 to avoid bug confusion.

Change 125192 had a related patch set uploaded by Tarrow:
Don't merge references with same hash into claims

https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/125192

Change 125192 merged by Addshore:
Don't merge references with same hash into claims

https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/125192

The recent associated patchset seems to not actually have anything even remotely to do with this issue; I've commented on the patchset to change the commit message and am reclosing.