[OSM-talk] Critical Mass for license change-over
flukas.robot+osm at gmail.com
Sat Jan 28 02:49:06 GMT 2012
understanding that some are tired by the discussions that certainly
preceded this licence changing endeavour and would like to have the
actual switch done asap and others have their own reasons the licence
change should not and cannot be rushed.
After of changing an agreement with several hundred thousands parties
cannot be expected to be quick or easy.
2012/1/28 Frederik Ramm <frederik at remote.org>:
> I think that realistically, taking into account the time, manpower, and
> other resources available, you can expect to have an unambiguous plan in the
> form of a verbal description, or *maybe* at most a script or program that
> enables you to generate an ODbL planet from the full history file*. But
> certainly not a definitive, fast, and planet-wide "cleanmap", nor regular
> planet dumps with the license change rules applied.
As far as I know there is no time limit imposed on us by some outer
entity (unless we consider OSMF an outer entity, which seems a really
bad idea in this context, but it is felt so by some). If available
manpower and resources need two years to prepare everything, so be it.
If paths, streets and even towns disappear, people will (rightfully)
hate anyone who pressed the button. The data was contributed with the
idea that can be used by anyone; not to be deleted as collateral
People care for their contributions so a more sensitive approach would
be in place. Trust of contributors that OSM is able and willing to
host their geodata is probably the most valuable asset, but is easily
lost. If some data is lost because of outer forces (earthquakes,
aliens) it is a reason to fix it, if it is deleted by the very
organization the data was entrusted to it is a reason to leave and
never come back.
I bet that for now, most of the mappers are unaware of what is coming
at them and if they find their favourite map piece empty, they will
not like it.
> I agree these things would be nice to have but I don't see where they should
> come from. Currently we don't even have the algorithm.
Not having the algorithm is part of the problem. Absence of these
signify that the change is not ready. They should come from whoever
needs the switch faster.
> If anyone has the hardware and time and brain capacity to build something
> that generates "parallel planet files", my recommendation is to start
> setting this up now, even though the final algorithm might not be clear, so
> that once the algorithm is published you can react quickly.
> Anyone who says "I can't really do anything before I know the exact
> algorithm" should perhaps take the second half of March off work.
Really? This sounds to me like: "Work bitches, you are not paid for
complaining". Considering that none of us gets paid for the work here,
it is quite inappropriate (as would be my reply to this).
> (*) There is no final algorithm. There is "the best that OSMF can come up
> with" but it will have problems, and there *will* be things deleted which
> will be reinstated later,
That is just stupid
> and there *will* be things kept which have to be
> deleted later after a complaint.
The algorithm is not expected to be 101% reliable, but a few errors to
be removed later do not even remotely compare to current uncertainty.
> In a way, the algorithm that OSMF comes up
> with is just a best guess, much like the algorithm currently used by the OSM
Lukáš Matějka (LM_1)
More information about the talk