[Local-chapters] Editable Servers

[Pieren]

2010/3/22 Jaak Laineste <jaak at nutiteq.com>

> a)      Banning official Chapters to create editable OSM clones does not
> have practical point, as long as any unofficial chapter, private person etc
> can do the same, with exactly the same consequences.
>
No. Local chapters get some responsibilities and rights. One is to be
allowed to use the name OpenStreetMap. That's the difference with private
persons. As a local representation, they can - as everyone - create an
editable clone but they "could" also claim it as "the local OpenStreetMap
dataset". My guess is that this clause is to prevent this type of action. LC
can call it "ourTempDatabase", "import", "dev", whatever, but having a
statement banning forked datasets claiming an official OSM representation is
a good point.
But the wording should be improved if it was really the intention of this
clause (e.g. "local chapters are not allowed to create a separate database
if it is intended to replace the single database managed by the OSMF" or
something like that.).

> b)      I am aware that distributed database architecture, with multiple
> edit points, is technically challenging. But in some point it may be really
> neccessary, in API 0.7.
>
This is a complete other topic which has nothing to do on this list.

Pieren
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/local-chapters/attachments/20100322/1f2c58ce/attachment.html>