[OSM-talk] Full Database dump request - forking possible Was: [Announce] OSMF license change vote has started
LeissKG at web.de
Sun Dec 6 14:39:00 GMT 2009
Am 6 Dec 2009 um 12:53 hat Simone Cortesi geschrieben:
> On Sun, Dec 6, 2009 at 10:59, Florian Lohoff <flo at rfc822.org> wrote:
> > I hereby request that the OSMF publishes a full (including history)
> > Database Dump just prior deleting non ODbL relicensed data to allow
> > a forking of OpenStreetmap under the old licensing terms.
> There already is a plan for a complete dump (with history). This will
> not happen tomorrow. Because we are not going to change the licence
> anyday this month.
That is nice to hear.
> I'm really hoping that nobody will effectively go on with a fork of the
Since some people feel about the vote like being held hostage with a gun
to their head somebody should solve their dilemma. Fork now and everybody
that might compelled to vote yes for fear to lose their data can vote no
and know they have a new project that has all the data but does not ignore
> The strenght of OpenStreetMap is in its community. We dont need a second
But some people seem to need no second license. I may not the only one
that sees similarities to the CDDB fiasco. I think the wording of the
license about future possible changes to the license is vague enough that
some people are uncomfortable. Maybe it is nessesary to state clearly in
the license that any further changes can not deprive the community of any
I have seen some of the license discussion in the past but could never
fathom who did give the OSMF the to initiate the new license process.
I would assume only a majority of the community would be able to do that.
But I have not found any mention of a vote where a majority of the
community said the wanted another license.
I would assume the correct way would have been to state the problem that
some people see with the license. Then ask if the majority feels the same.
And only then initiatiate a process to change it. But even then only in
the direction the majority want since there seems to be people that want a
more open license. Maybe a majority is quite kool with Google stealing
their data since this people only want free map data. If one looks at how
much contributors Google has for their maps this is not unreasonable.
More information about the talk