[OSM-talk] Multiple OSM instances
Serge Wroclawski
emacsen at gmail.com
Tue Oct 5 16:39:20 BST 2010
On Tue, Oct 5, 2010 at 10:50 AM, 80n <80n80n at gmail.com> wrote:
> It's inevitable that there will be at least one fork of OSM content if the
> license is switched to ODbL + CT.
That's yet to be seen, unless you're saying that you personally will
make it happen.
> So the question I'd like to ask is, what things can be done to make such
> projects play nicer and interoperate better when they do happen?
Unsubscribing from osm-talk will go a long way to making people close
to the project stop being angry with the forkers, if they don't
interrupt our work with constant complaints couched in terms of
"thought experiments" or "theoretical questions".
> I'm not
> just interested in technical solutions, but also organisational and
> community based solutions. What guidelines should duplicate OSMs follow?
It'll greatly depend on the individuals involved, but some of the
forkers have lost a lot of respect of the OSM community by being
generally disruptive, by making unsubstantiated claims, spreading FUD,
and talking about forking nearly twice a week for several months. At
that point it becomes difficult to work with such a person
collaboratively. It's possible not all the forkers are like that, but
certainly the loudest forkers on this list have created a situation of
a difficult interpersonal relationship, which will detract from any
attempt at a collabrorative environment.
Once bitten, twice shy, as they say.
> I'm particularly interested in how it could be made easier for contributors
> to handle the situation. How will they know which OSM they should
> contribute to?
There is only one OSM project. Other projects shouldn't be using the OSM name.
- Serge
More information about the talk
mailing list