[josm-dev] Change to changeset comment handling, RfD

[Sebastian Klein]

Frederik Ramm wrote:
> Hi,
> 
>    I have changed the way JOSM treats changeset comments. This is a 
> politically sensitive topic (see recent discussion on talk list), so I'd 
> value your input. I'm willing to revert the change (applied in r3399) if 
> people think it is for the worse.
> 
> Tha vast majority of mappers agree that changeset comments are useful, 
> and that it is good if they are used. Where there's disagreement, 
> however, is in the question of whether edtiors should enforce changeset 
> comments or not.
> 
> Some people do not want to enter changeset comments, and thus are 
> unhappy if their editor forces them to.
> 
> Some people want to enter changeset comments and want everyone else to 
> do it, but they fear that forcing people to enter something will only 
> create bitterness, and people will start entering useless comments like 
> "some fixes", "..." and the like.
> 
> Some people think that the editor must not give people an excuse not to 
> enter a changeset ("but I didn't know it was required...") and thus want 
> the editor to enforce that as far as possible (of course no editor can 
> check whether what's entered makes sense).
> 
> For a while now, JOSM has forced people to add a changeset comment that 
> is at least three characters long, and refused to perform an upload 
> otherwise. In addition, JOSM *always* loaded that last recently used 
> changeset comment as a default, making it easy for people to erroneously 
> continue using an old comment.
> 
> I have now changed this in the following way:
> 
> * The last recently used changeset description is only loaded as default 
> if it was used less than 4 hours ago. Otherwise there is no default.
> 
> * If you try to upload a changeset with a comment of less than 10 (!) 
> characters, there's a dialog that explains the importance of changeset 
> comments, and asks the user to reconsider. The user may refuse to 
> reconsider, in which case JOSM will proceed with the upload, even if the 
> changeset comment is empty.
> 
> I think that this strikes the right balance between trying to educate 
> the user and still giving him the freedom to say no.
> 
> I do have an user interface problem however. The dialog I'm displaying 
> is a bit funny. It has the buttons "yes, reconsider" and "no, continue 
> uploading" (because I *want* people to reconsider - thus the fat green 
> check mark with that option). But now if you see the dialog and press 
> ESC, it proceeds with uploading, which is undesirable. I don't know how 
> to solve this. Any ideas?
> 
> As I said, if people think this makes things worse, we can always go 
> back. It's a difficult thing. Nobody likes to be bossed around by 
> software - but then again it's no good if the software makes it sound 
> like everything is ok and later you get flamed on the mailing lists (by 
> people like me) for not using changeset comments ;)

Hi,

Good idea. I modified it a little, because the buttons and their icons 
might be somewhat misleading. For me, the cancel icon is associated with 
"Take me back, I don't want to break anything here!" rather than 
"Beware! Don't click this button!".

Also added "don't show this message again"-checkbox.


Sebastian