[OSM-talk] collateral damage (was: What the license change is going to do to the map)

M∡rtin Koppenhoefer dieterdreist at gmail.com
Thu Feb 10 19:14:49 GMT 2011

2011/2/10 Frederik Ramm <frederik at remote.org>:
>> As an example, on September 5, 2009, I added Carrollwood Bicycle Emporium
>> (484675555), a bicycle shop, to a shopping center. On October 12, Anthony
>> added an address to this bicycle shop.
> And on October 14, Anthony removed that bicycle shop, and it has been
> removed ever since.
> On October 19, Anthony created two nodes, 535406826 and 535416420, both for
> this same bicycle shop. These have been affected by the reversion because by
> working the way he did, Anthony severed the history ties to your original
> version. Had he simply added to your node, instead of deleting and
> re-creating it, then a clean reversal would have been possible.

I think that in this particular case it might be OK that deletions
were not undone (you could argue that deletion with Google as base is
not possible, at least it would be almost impossible to proove). But
for the license change I wonder: how will we deal with the deletion
part of edits from contributors that did not agree to the new ct/odbl?
Will these deletions be reverted or not?


More information about the talk mailing list