[Osmf-talk] New license change proposal status

SteveC steve at asklater.com
Wed Dec 2 20:06:08 UTC 2009

On Dec 2, 2009, at 11:57 AM, Emilio Anzon wrote:

> On Wed, Dec 02, 2009 at 10:17:58AM -0800, SteveC wrote:
>> On Dec 2, 2009, at 4:14 AM, Richard Fairhurst wrote:
>>> Frederik Ramm wrote:
>>>> All the pain I expressed above could have been reduced a bit if you
>>>> could have been bothered to put the three-part question to the community
>>>> like I suggested:
>>>>>> ( ) I release my data under ODbL
>>>>>> ( ) I do not release my data under ODbL
>>>>>> ( ) I consider all my data PD anyway and don't claim database
>>>>>> protection so do whatever you want
>>>> However, you believe that even this would overtax the average community
>>>> member.
>>> I strongly agree with Frederik on this one.
>>> In my opinion - and you may say that the Potlatch author is the last  
>>> person anyone should be asking about usability ;) - offering the third  
>>> option is a _big_ win for simplicity.
>>> Never mind the legal arguments; never mind GPL vs BSD; never mind  
>>> 49.9% or 90% or CC0 or any of that. In most mappers' eyes, the three  
>>> choices above mean:
>>>   [ ] Yes
>>>   [ ] No
>>>   [ ] Yes and please don't bother me again
>>> We tend to forget, here and on legal-talk, that by definition we are  
>>> the people who care about this deeply. Most people don't. Most people  
>>> just want to go mapping.
>>> Offering a PD option means "Whatever. I trust you guys. I just like  
>>> mapping. I really don't want to be bothered by any more e-mails about  
>>> relicensing."
>> That's what *you* think it means. I think it means "Whatever, be like FreeBSD and let's die as quickly as possible".
>> Yours &c.
> Hi,
> I think that *maybe" what he thinks could be shared by _many_ people...
> until you make a survey how can you know the answer ??

I think that *maybe* what I think could be shared by _many_ people....

until you let the LWG actually do something, like I don't know... do the vote on the license maybe? Then how can I know the answer??

> BTW: which is your def. of "dead" ? :P

Dead as in FreeBSD. Alive as in Linux.

Yours &c.


More information about the osmf-talk mailing list