<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
1. Sierpień 2018 21:27 od <a href="mailto:matkoniecz@tutanota.com" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">matkoniecz@tutanota.com</a>:<br /><br /><blockquote class="tutanota_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid #93A3B8; padding-left: 10px; margin-left: 5px;">
31. Lipiec 2018 23:49 od <a href="mailto:frederik@remote.org" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">frederik@remote.org</a>:<br /><br /><blockquote class="tutanota_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid #93A3B8; padding-left: 10px; margin-left: 5px;">an interesting read: "The social construction of technological stasis:<br />The stagnating data structure in OpenStreetMap."<br /></blockquote><p><br /></p><p>It is hard for me to treat seriously something that has</p><p><br /></p><p>"<span class="captionLabel">Figure 6.</span> Code revisions per month and person in OSM’s SVN repository (<a class="ext-link" href="https://svn.openstreetmap.org" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">https://svn.openstreetmap.org</a>)."</p><p><br /></p><p>graph ending in 2008.<br /></p></blockquote><p><br /></p><p>To be clear: I know that there are some attempts to cover activity after 2008</p><div>but I would expect from research more than disjointed graphs that are</div><div>impossible to compare. </div><p><br /></p><p>I know that it is not very easy to do, but I would expect something more</p><p>than automatic github graphs provide from something that attempts to be <br /></p><p>a scientific research.<br /></p> </body>
</html>