[OSM-talk] Defining critical mass...

[Kevin Peat]

In a project where there are endless copies of the data floating around the
net I can't see how deleting non-trivial amounts of data is going to work
anyway. What is going to stop people who don't care about the license
change, or are just pissed off to lose "their" work, just re-uploading the
deleted data, if necessary with minimal changes to defeat any checks there
might be?

My area was mostly blank before I started mapping but there were some roads
traced very roughly from the old NPE maps which I then surveyed on the
ground and aligned correctly. If that original user votes against the
license change then would those roads be deleted from the db regardless of
the fact I might have edited them multiple times since?  If the answer to
that is yes then I'm struggling to see why I wouldn't just re-upload the
latest version that I edited and how I would be wrong if I did so.

I would rather see a solution that doesn't require data to be deleted, so
new contributions + significant edits are under the new license and maybe
involving the planet files and the like being split by license until the day
when the old license ceases to be an issue. If the data turns-over as
frequently as people say then this needn't be a very long time.

Kevin




On 14 July 2010 12:52, John Smith <deltafoxtrot256 at gmail.com> wrote:

> On 14 July 2010 20:59, Richard Weait <richard at weait.com> wrote:
> > What do you suggest would be acceptable / unacceptable?
>
> I would consider things to fail if more than 5-10% of data disappears
> in any region. At the very least it would be demoralising for anyone
> that spent even a few hours working to make OSM data better.
>
> ...snipped
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/attachments/20100714/127a0120/attachment.html>