What is meta? ×
Meta Stack Exchange is where users like you discuss bugs, features, and support issues that affect the software powering all 134 Stack Exchange communities.

There have been several question about the process of migrating Stack Exchange 1.0 sites to the Stack Exchange 2.0 system. I thought it might be useful to create a list of Area 51 proposals that are migration candidates, i.e. have a posted comment along the lines of "this is a replacement for x" where x is a Stack Exchange 1.0 site.

share|improve this question

2 Answers 2

I have no access to information that could tell me definitely that a site will or will not be migrated. All I can do is list those for which a migration has been suggested. There are a number of other proposals which overlap existing Stack Exchange 1.0 sites but I've only included the ones where the link between proposal and 1.0 site was mostly unambiguous.

Additional information

  • The primary source is definition phase comments on Area 51, but there isn't always a comment that clearly indicates a migration proposal. However, in some cases, it may be possible to corroborate a migration suggestion using other sources.

  • If there is evidence that might indicate the site owner's support for a migration to Stack Exchange 2.0 I have added a reference and link after the name of the existing site.

  • If I was able to find it, the copyright license has been indicated or linked; for a Creative commons license this is shown as "(cc) type". Some of the licenses (or lack thereof) may be incompatible with Stack Exchange 2.0. (Note: the sites listed appear to have a Creative Commons BY-SA 2.5 license on their RSS feeds regardless of what is displayed in the site HTML.)

  • based on the SharePoint Overflow welcome post some migrations may be limited to user accounts and not posts. However, the door is left open to importing some portion of the post content from the previous site after some time in beta.

I apologize for any errors I might have made. I also have not looked at every proposal on Area 51 so I've probably missed some.

Phase: Launched (beta seeded with migrated content)

Phase: Launched (beta not seeded with content from a pre-existing site)

Phase: Public Beta (actually migrated)

Phase: Public Beta (not seeded with migrated content)

Phase: Commitment

Phase: Commitment (proposed seed candidate offline/moved, migration unlikely)

Closed on Area 51

Deleted from Area 51

share|improve this answer
    
"Gardening and Farming Organically" - organicgreenfingers.com –  Ciaran De Buitlear Sep 8 '10 at 15:51
    
@Ciaran I have added this site proposal to the list. When I saw it on Area 51, I didn't notice that Organic Green Fingers was an SE 1.0 site. I didn't have time to follow all the links so I just looked for comments like "this is a replacement for x". –  moberley Sep 8 '10 at 18:32

The decision to migrate a site doesn't usually come until after the proposal is nearing completion. Proposals are defined by the Area 51 community and there's no guarantee that the proposed site will develop in a way that is compatible with the SE 1.0 site. Also, the site itself has to have sufficient traffic to qualify as a Network site to be migrated. Finally, these are privately-owned systems and they are under no obligation to migrate their site, even if there is a compatible proposal. Most site owners take a wait-and-see stance when there is a similar site proposed.

share|improve this answer
    
However, since they also use the CC-by-SA license, the contents could be copied with attribution to the original site (just like all the SO-vampires do, only in this case, we're the good guys. right?) –  Tobias Kienzler Sep 6 '10 at 9:00
1  
@Tobias SE 1.0 had no requirement for the content to be CC-BY-SA. I don't know how many actually did use that license. –  balpha Sep 6 '10 at 11:55
    
@balpha I didn't know that, I only checked mathoverflow.net –  Tobias Kienzler Sep 6 '10 at 13:05
    
@balpha Concerning the ones moberley listed, they either have no license mentioned at all, or CC-BY-SA. –  Tobias Kienzler Sep 6 '10 at 13:23
1  
Just FYI, when there is no explicit license, the default state of published material is that all copyright is retained by the original author automatically (at least in the US). The "I am not a lawyer" yada yada applies. –  Robert Cartaino Sep 7 '10 at 15:50

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .