Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
> have you thought about deprecating the "live"-mode in PL1 though? I
> really think it is a pain and was happy when you wrote in another
> thread that it will not be available in PL2.
Indeed, you've mentioned one or two (million) times before you're no
fan of it. :)
2010/3/15 Richard Fairhurst :
> ... I have no
> intention to deprecate Potlatch 1, but would like to keep it available
> in parallel.
have you thought about deprecating the "live"-mode in PL1 though? I
really think it is a pain and was happy when you wrote in another
thread that it will not be av
Jochen Plumeyer wrote:
> mtasc is great (especially in combination with swfmill ), a super fast
> ActionScript 1.0/2.0 compiler, and permits a workflow with Makefiles (and
> vim ;-) ).
> Sorry, but with the Adobe tools I turn into an aggressive Taliban over time,
> thousands of mouse clicks until y
Richard Fairhurst:
> Personally? I don't give a shit about free software. Or
> respectability.
>
> cheers
> Richard
OK. May I then conclude mine and your off-topic posts ended on this
thread? So it's up for anyone else to post on-topic replies regarding
this topic.
Kind regards,
Niklas
--
si
Hi folks,
Regarding Flash development with OpenSource tools:
On Vie 12 Mar 2010, jamesmikedup...@googlemail.com wrote:
> I think the issue with flash is not the software, but the runtime.
> [...]
> I am going to try and use this :
> ActionScript 2 to Flash (SWF) compiler
> http://www.mtasc.org/
I have started to port mapzen to haxe, all help appreciated.
http://osmopenlayers.blogspot.com/2010/03/start-of-port-of-mapzen-to-haxe.html
mike
On Fri, Mar 12, 2010 at 9:56 AM, John Smith wrote:
> On 12 March 2010 18:52, jamesmikedup...@googlemail.com
> wrote:
> > Question is : can a user use
On Fri, Mar 12, 2010 at 9:07 AM, Richard Fairhurst wrote:
> On 12/03/2010 07:54, John Smith wrote:
>> On 12 March 2010 17:50, Frederik Ramm wrote:
>>> jamesmikedup...@googlemail.com wrote:
If all the code and all the tools we used were to be licensed costly
software, who would pay for O
On 12 March 2010 18:52, jamesmikedup...@googlemail.com
wrote:
> Question is : can a user use openstreetmap without accepted any license
> agreements from adobe? Is it possible to contribute using only free
> software.
As someone pointed out the other day this is blown out of proportion
since most
On Fri, Mar 12, 2010 at 9:45 AM, John Smith wrote:
> On 12 March 2010 18:27, Frederik Ramm wrote:
> > Mapzen doesn't count - it is open source ;-)
>
> So is potlatch, but that doesn't seem to have stopped people from
> complaining about it being non-free for some reason...
>
I think the issue wi
On 12 March 2010 18:27, Frederik Ramm wrote:
> Mapzen doesn't count - it is open source ;-)
So is potlatch, but that doesn't seem to have stopped people from
complaining about it being non-free for some reason...
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetma
On Fri, Mar 12, 2010 at 9:27 AM, Frederik Ramm wrote:
> Hi,
>
>
> John Smith wrote:
>
>> If all the code and all the tools we used were to be licensed costly
software, who would pay for OSM?
>>> We'd all use Google Map Maker then. Under Safari ;-)
>>>
>>
>> What about Mapzen under IE?
Hi,
John Smith wrote:
>>> If all the code and all the tools we used were to be licensed costly
>>> software, who would pay for OSM?
>> We'd all use Google Map Maker then. Under Safari ;-)
>
> What about Mapzen under IE? *ducks*
Mapzen doesn't count - it is open source ;-)
Bye
Frederik
Lets take this one step further,
what if you just put all your data under the public domain and had no
creative commons which was directly inspired from the free software
foundations GPL?
http://www.fsf.org/appeal/2009/lawrence-lessig/?searchterm=lessig
You would have no basis for contribution.
Ho
On 12/03/2010 07:54, John Smith wrote:
> On 12 March 2010 17:50, Frederik Ramm wrote:
>> jamesmikedup...@googlemail.com wrote:
>>> If all the code and all the tools we used were to be licensed costly
>>> software, who would pay for OSM?
>> We'd all use Google Map Maker then. Under Safari ;-)
> Wha
On 12 March 2010 17:50, Frederik Ramm wrote:
> Hi,
>
> jamesmikedup...@googlemail.com wrote:
>> If all the code and all the tools we used were to be licensed costly
>> software, who would pay for OSM?
>
> We'd all use Google Map Maker then. Under Safari ;-)
What about Mapzen under IE? *ducks*
__
Hi,
jamesmikedup...@googlemail.com wrote:
> If all the code and all the tools we used were to be licensed costly
> software, who would pay for OSM?
We'd all use Google Map Maker then. Under Safari ;-)
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33"
__
On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 11:11 PM, Richard Fairhurst wrote:
>
> Niklas Cholmkvist wrote:
> > How can potlatch be respectable if it is based on non-free
> > software? (non-free flash, and you can't touch their source
> > code!)
>
> Personally? I don't give a shit about free software. Or respectabili
Niklas Cholmkvist wrote:
> How can potlatch be respectable if it is based on non-free
> software? (non-free flash, and you can't touch their source
> code!)
Personally? I don't give a shit about free software. Or respectability.
cheers
Richard
writing on OS X and Safari :)
--
View this messag
Hi,
Niklas Cholmkvist wrote:
> How can potlatch be respectable if it is based on non-free software?
> (non-free flash, and you can't touch their source code!) You can run
> JOSM using only libre and/or open source software. Not only JOSM,
> there's much more software that can be run on fully free
2010/3/11 Iván Sánchez Ortega :
> El día Thursday 11 March 2010 11:40:56, Frederik Ramm dijo:
>> I'm not sure; my guess is that the world is silently waiting for
>> Potlatch 2 to be released and will *then* complain about everything that
>> *still* doesn't work.
>
> The world is trying to *preempti
Richard Fairhurst wrote:
> ...JOSM in anticipation of imminent Potlatch 2 wondrousness.
How can potlatch be respectable if it is based on non-free software?
(non-free flash, and you can't touch their source code!) You can run
JOSM using only libre and/or open source software. Not only JOSM,
there
:D
Any clues or teasers as to what this might contain?
> - Original Message -
> From: "Richard Fairhurst"
> To: talk@openstreetmap.org
> Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] JOSM will move to Java6
> Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2010 02:23:00 -0800 (PST)
>
>
>
> Frede
El día Thursday 11 March 2010 11:40:56, Frederik Ramm dijo:
> I'm not sure; my guess is that the world is silently waiting for
> Potlatch 2 to be released and will *then* complain about everything that
> *still* doesn't work.
The world is trying to *preemptively* ban potlatch 2 :-P
--
Iván Sánch
On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 09:30, Frederik Ramm wrote:
> Java6 has been around for more than three years now (and other OSM
> software, e.g. Osmosis, already depends on it) so if you are still using
> an older version it might be time to upgrade. (If you are in the
> unfortunate situation of having w
Frederik Ramm wrote:
> I'm not sure; my guess is that the world is silently waiting for
> Potlatch 2 to be released and will *then* complain about everything
> that *still* doesn't work.
>
> (My info comes from several mentions on, you guessed it, talk-de.)
Oh, I'd guessed that much. No-one outsi
On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 10:40 AM, Frederik Ramm wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Richard Fairhurst wrote:
>>> The world doesn't require Potlatch 2 wondrousness. The world would
>>> already sigh with relief if Potlatch could be made to not break
>>> relation ordering when a way is split ;-)
>>
>> Has the world lod
Hi,
Richard Fairhurst wrote:
>> The world doesn't require Potlatch 2 wondrousness. The world would
>> already sigh with relief if Potlatch could be made to not break
>> relation ordering when a way is split ;-)
>
> Has the world lodged a trac ticket?
I'm not sure; my guess is that the world is s
Frederik Ramm wrote:
> The world doesn't require Potlatch 2 wondrousness. The world would
> already sigh with relief if Potlatch could be made to not break
> relation ordering when a way is split ;-)
Has the world lodged a trac ticket?
cheers
Richard
___
Hi,
Richard Fairhurst wrote:
>> If you are in the unfortunate situation of having willfully
>> chained yourself to one Hardware/OS supplier and that
>> supplier is unwilling to release Java6 for your platform,
>> it may be time to finally ditch
>
> ...JOSM in anticipation of imminent Potlatch
Frederik Ramm wrote:
> If you are in the unfortunate situation of having willfully
> chained yourself to one Hardware/OS supplier and that
> supplier is unwilling to release Java6 for your platform,
> it may be time to finally ditch
...JOSM in anticipation of imminent Potlatch 2 wondrousness.
All,
Dirk (the current JOSM maintainer) has just announced on josm-dev
that JOSM will move to Java6 around the end of this month. This means
that anyone who does not have Java6 may continue to work with the
current JOSM release but will not be able to use the new builds from
April on.
Bac
31 matches
Mail list logo
