[OSM-talk] It's all too fast...

[Gervase Markham]

On 03/03/09 18:23, Andy Allan wrote:
> We've been talking about the ODbL for a loooong time now, way more
> than 18 months. It's not completely new. The previous draft was dated
> April 2008. If you're new to the discussions, then welcome, but don't
> make like the ODbL has never been seen before and that we're trying to
> do everything in 1 month.

Everything that Frederik said. There has been no interactive discussion 
with the editors of the licence, no formal place (as there is now on 
co-ment.net) for collating and discussing issues, no explanation of the 
deltas from the previous draft to this, no explanation of how it might 
work in a range of possible use cases, etc. etc.

You say the licence isn't completely new. Where's the document showing 
the differences from the previously discussed draft, along with the 
rationale for why each change was made? Something like this:
http://gplv3.fsf.org/rationale
(PDF document)
I believe the GPLv3 process issued three or four of those, although they 
appear to have taken all but the final one down.

Without such a document, it might as well be completely new.

Gerv