[Osmf-talk] The license/fork discussion: A solution proposal
agerio at yahoo.es
Tue Aug 24 12:50:42 UTC 2010
The first problem that comes to my mind is that every node/way may
(and probably will) be edited multiple times by users with different
license choices. How will we solve this? The first contributors choice
rules the rest of the node/ways life? Will we implement a way to
export the whole DB with the last version (in the license of your
choice) of every node/way? (that probably will violate the previous
editions of that node/way done under the other license. This under the
supposition that the first contributors choice doesn't rules the
My point is that this kind of idea, even though well intended, seems
Even though I am not very happy with CT3, I do understand that the
license must be one. And that if someone is truly uncomfortable with
the ODbL will eventually have to fork (this under the assumption that
most of the contributors accept the new license and CT).
On Tue, Aug 24, 2010 at 3:17 AM, ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert
Gremmen <g.gremmen at cetest.nl> wrote:
> This is a crossposting with OSM-talk. My apologies. But I think it is
> There is a long violent discussion about the OSM license, the choice to
> be made and
> some people event want to leave OSM and start a fork. This discussion
> also lead to moderation and too much emotional talk.
> This eventually will lead to the end of OSM, a really unwanted
> I therefore have the following proposal:
> A fork as stipulated should not be necessarily about a group of people
> leaving OSM , but about
> we (OSM) deciding to continue in two or more future directions,
> covered by different licenses, and maybe finally decide which license
> fits best.
> This would require the OSM database to include a extra field for each
> and every item indicating the license
> the data was provided by its contributor. The license choice can be made
> in the users profile.
> For most of OSM there is no difference.
> The license is only relevant once data is extracted to external
> External parties will therefore always know under what license any node
> and any way of the
> database had been granted to them.
> The map server and most applications at would remain as they are,
> our own applications are not license sensitive.
> We may however create a second or more maps showing only the data from
> specific licenses
> and enabling OSM-ers to evaluate the consequences of their choices.
> I think this is the only way to solve this everlasting and destructive
> license discussion.
> It requires however, some flexibility of mind, and the trust that OSM
> will not
> abuse the choice made by its contributors. As the database and the
> license field will
> be visible to all of us, I trust that will be not a major problem.
> Gert Gremmen
> osmf-talk mailing list
> osmf-talk at openstreetmap.org
More information about the osmf-talk