[OSM-talk] Let's prepare to Fork OSM to a CCBYSA 2.0 continuation

80n 80n80n at gmail.com
Mon Aug 23 16:16:39 BST 2010


On Mon, Aug 23, 2010 at 3:21 PM, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer <dieterdreist at gmail.com
> wrote:

> 2010/8/23 Michael Kugelmann <MichaelK_OSM at gmx.de>:
> > BTW: @Felix Hartmann
> > using words like
> >>
> >> so fuck off.
> >
> > shows that you don't have arguments. So step back - defamation is alsways
> a
> > sign of weakness. Learn a good conduct before you continues with the
> > discussion.
>
>
> to be fair: he didn't write (others) should f**k off, what he meant
> was "clearly state this somewhere and tell everyone else to fuck off".
> Thus I agree that this might not be adequate language, you shouldn't
> critisize him for that, probably he wasn't aware because English is
> not his primary language.
>
> On the argument I agree though: make your own mailing lists for your
> fork. It's probably OK to announce it here (with an URL where to go,
> which was actually missing in your announcement), but further
> discussions should then be brought to the place of your fork, not
> inside the resources of OSM.
>
> I also agree it would be absurd to have OSM handle over the account
> data of its contributors (and is against almost any privacy law at
> least in Europe). There is also no logics in that: people who want to
> can simply create a new account with their old credentials on the fork
> site (I'm not planning to join the fork, but if I was I surely
> wouldn't use the same pw I used for OSM).
>
> There is absolutely no need for OSM to relinquish any private account
data.  No fork will ever need that data and I doubt that any fork would even
bother asking OSM for it.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/attachments/20100823/30d7c82c/attachment.html>


More information about the talk mailing list