[OSM-talk] Not-properly-Open-but-called-Open

[Dave F.]

Frederik Ramm wrote:
> Hi,
>
>      I'm breaking this out of talk-gb and into talk.
>
> Richard Fairhurst wrote:
>   
>> Sadly [the openmtbmap author] 
>> refuses to open-source his code 
>> (http://openmtbmap.org/faq/#i-would-like-to-have-a-look-into-the-style-file-for-mkgmap), 
>> which is entirely his prerogative but a shame nonetheless.
>>     
>
> Maybe it is time for us at OSM to make a distinction between
>
> (a) open projects in the sense and spirit of OSM, where scripts, style 
> files, and everything else is open and license-wise available for 
> everyone to look at and build upon, and
>
> (b) proprietary projects, whether of commercial or private nature, which 
> we are still happy to have using our data and which we will still linkt 
> to and all, but which we do not consider "part of the family".
>
>   
I think it's high time this was done. IMO, OCM should be removed from 
the main map options asked persuasively to rename themselves as they're 
not really open, are they?

Fredrick - I think this needs a separate new topic.

Cheers
Dave F.