[OSM-dev] Improving History and Monitoring
ian.dees at gmail.com
Sat May 7 16:39:15 BST 2011
On Sat, May 7, 2011 at 10:29 AM, Tom Hughes <tom at compton.nu> wrote:
> On 07/05/11 16:26, Ian Dees wrote:
> Why is filtering off the table? Just don't output the items that have
>> "big" marked. Sure we still have to use CPU time to determine the size
>> of the bbox, but we're already doing that. Equal CPU time for a possible
>> improvement to user experience seems fine to me.
> I have refused to apply patches which do that, because I want somebody to
> fix it properly and I am trying to incentivise people to do so.
It appears that OWL is the way forward then. Will you allow patches that use
OWL's API to request history or will that fall under "no external services"?
Presumably when OWL gets real hardware it will be a different machine but on
the same network.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the dev