[OSM-legal-talk] Number of active contributors

Liz edodd at billiau.net
Tue Feb 16 19:45:58 GMT 2010

On Wed, 17 Feb 2010, Simon Ward wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 16, 2010 at 06:31:59PM +0100, Mike Collinson wrote:
> > Interesting. That is a lower figure than I personally was envisioning
> > when we made the above definition, and therefore potentially
> > disenfranchising of genuine OSM community.  Perhaps we should review it,
> > 3 calendar months in the last 12 perhaps?? Comments welcome.
> I have previously expressed my opinion that the definition was too
> narrow, and seeing the statistics has strengthened that.
> I preferred scrapping the “activeness” check entirely (and still do),
> but later suggested 18 months.
> I don’t think the requirement should necessarilly be that those
> contributions be evenly spread out.  E.g. months 1-3 of 18 should be
> acceptable.
> Simon
I think that a lot of mappers are seasonal mappers - summer is a big impetus 
to go outside and see the world.
So 'activity' needs to cover more than one year.

More information about the legal-talk mailing list