[Talk-ca] Cleanup

[Richard Weait]

On Fri, Mar 2, 2012 at 12:57 PM, Paul Norman <penorman at mac.com> wrote:
>> From: Richard Weait [mailto:richard at weait.com]
>> Sent: Friday, March 02, 2012 5:42 AM
>> Subject: Re: [Talk-ca] Cleanup
>>
>> On Fri, Mar 2, 2012 at 4:10 AM, Paul Norman <penorman at mac.com> wrote:
>> >> On Wed, Feb 1, 2012 at 2:36 PM, Richard Weait <richard at weait.com>
>> wrote:
>> >> I suggest that we can have more tainted data removed automatically,
>>
>> > It appears that the bot is deleting ways more extensive than those
>> proposed.
>>
>> Ah, that's my fault.  I miss-stated the scope when I requested the
>> removal.  The result will be the equivalent of the automated cleanup
>> after the license change, for those three accounts.  I'm inclined to
>> have it continue; this is making remapping faster / easier.  Apologies
>> for my confusing the issue.
>>
>> Last time, some nodes were cleaned up after the ways were removed.  I
>> expect this will be similar.
>>
>> Best regards,
>> Richard
>
> I'm not sure what the best way to proceed.

I think that it is.  We're just a few weeks ahead of everybody else.

> Proceeding with the node removals
> will still leave stray nodes as I believe there are false negatives in the
> license change algorithms used.

Do you have examples so that the algorithm and process can be checked?

> When I suggested a second run targeting
> items where all versions were created by one of the accounts it was because
> the first run had essentially missed some objects.

Did you present examples to check?  Again, if the process or algorithm
can be improved, perhaps we should woork towards that?