[OSM-legal-talk] Phase 4 and what it means

[Frederik Ramm]

Hi,

Maarten Deen wrote:
>> Any misunderstanding in this area will lead to friction: mapper A
>> thought he still had time to reconsider; but mapper B goes ahead and
>> deletes/re-maps A's work (possibly with less precision or other things
>> that A doesn't like). A, who intended to stay with OSM but was just
>> playing a little game of stubbornness and protest, is infuriated ("how
>> could you throw away my super precise mapping!"), and B has wasted his
>> time.

> If that is your attitude towards the license change

I was describing the attitude of other people, and trying to make the 
point that we need to send them a clear message.

> If the object of the 
> game is to change the license regardless of anything,

At this point in time it is very likely that the license change will go 
through.

> then just change 
> it already.

I think the time before the actual switch (i.e. before phase 5) should 
be used to pre-emptively remap everything that has not been relicensed, 
so that we have a smooth transition instead of having to endure empty 
spots on the map. Nobody gains if we do this in haste.

Bye
Frederik

-- 
Frederik Ramm  ##  eMail frederik at remote.org  ##  N49°00'09" E008°23'33"