[talk-au] Looks like Nearmap is gone from JOSM slippymap plugin
andrew.harvey4 at gmail.com
Sat Nov 27 09:08:14 GMT 2010
On Fri, Nov 26, 2010 at 10:49 PM, Frederik Ramm <frederik at remote.org> wrote:
> You can of course fork whatever you like, but allow me to point out that
> (1) if you are unhappy with the slippy map plugin, why not fork that instead
> of the whole editor.
> (2) the slippy map plugin can be configured via the preferences to use
> almost any kind of data source, whether legal or not; it is just that the
> *default* datasources that are available with one click should not contain
> something that causes licensing problems down the line.
Yes. I should have been more specific.
On Sat, Nov 27, 2010 at 7:53 PM, Steve Bennett <stevagewp at gmail.com> wrote:
> Yes. The reason given for removing Nearmap from Potlatch 1 was
> (paraphrasing): "Users who have agreed to the CTs must not use
> Nearmap. Potlatch cannot tell whether a given user has agreed to the
> CTs. We do not want to spend time adding that support, because we'd
> rather work on Potlatch 2. Therefore we have disabled Nearmap for all
> I think that's a fairly defensible position. Obviously it sucks for
> those of us who haven't agreed to the CTs, and want to continue to use
> Nearmap (which we're entitled to do). But it's fair enough.
> So the question is: is this the same reasoning for removing Nearmap as
> an option from JOSM? Could a better solution be found, like perhaps
> flashing an alert to anyone selecting Nearmap, warning them that they
> must not use it if they have agreed to the CTs?
I wonder if one was to code this and submit a patch to do this which
follows the existing style guidelines, would it be accepted into the
More information about the Talk-au