Re: [OSM-talk] Multiple versions of same node in changeset
2011/6/25 Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org: If you're editing in a place where you have reason to believe that you're not the only one, uploading often isn't too bad a habit - reduces the likelihood of conflicts! Yes, but is there a point of doing this within the same changeset? Cheers, Martin ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Multiple versions of same node in changeset
Am 26.06.2011 13:53, schrieb M∡rtin Koppenhoefer: 2011/6/25 Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org: If you're editing in a place where you have reason to believe that you're not the only one, uploading often isn't too bad a habit - reduces the likelihood of conflicts! Yes, but is there a point of doing this within the same changeset? Of course you quite possibly need to touch objects multiple times while editing, and if you save in-between you get multiple versions in the same changeset. I personally try to keep changesets small, and usually close changesets on save, thus breaking large edits into smaller changesets if reasonable. -- Dirk-Lüder Deelkar Kreie Bremen - 53.0901°N 8.7868°E signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Multiple versions of same node in changeset
M∡rtin Koppenhoefer wrote: Yes, but is there a point of doing this within the same changeset? Yes, of course there is. If you're using an online editor you should save early and save often. When the user chooses to start/finish a changeset has no bearing on that. cheers Richard -- View this message in context: http://gis.638310.n2.nabble.com/Multiple-versions-of-same-node-in-changeset-tp6515184p6517120.html Sent from the General Discussion mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Multiple versions of same node in changeset
Richard Fairhurst wrote: M∡rtin Koppenhoefer wrote: Yes, but is there a point of doing this within the same changeset? Yes, of course there is. If you're using an online editor you should save early and save often. When the user chooses to start/finish a changeset has no bearing on that. The problem is that saving and committing are, in this case, the same action. While it's of course desirable to commit somewhat frequently (to avoid conflicts), it's not desirable to commit your unfinished in-progress edits every few seconds. I'm somewhat paranoid myself and tend to hit Ctrl+S frequently when editing text or code. But co-developers would lynch me if I made it a habit to *commit* changes to the sourcecode repository after each new line of code, and for good reason. -- Tobias Knerr ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Multiple versions of same node in changeset
Tobias Knerr writes: The problem is that saving and committing are, in this case, the same action. While it's of course desirable to commit somewhat frequently (to avoid conflicts), it's not desirable to commit your unfinished in-progress edits every few seconds. I'm somewhat paranoid myself and tend to hit Ctrl+S frequently when editing text or code. But co-developers would lynch me if I made it a habit to *commit* changes to the sourcecode repository after each new line of code, and for good reason. Different thing entirely. My edit to code you're working on could break the code so that you would have to stop coding. My edit to a map region you're working on isn't going to stop you from editing. It might create a conflict, but saving more often will reduce conflicts because it will spread the edit around sooner. So yeah. Commit working code, but commit map edits ASAP. A changeset is just a way to collate related edits. There are tools to revert an entire changeset, but it's not clear that that's preferable to reverting individual edits. -- --my blog is athttp://blog.russnelson.com Crynwr supports open source software 521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315-600-8815 Potsdam, NY 13676-3213 | Sheepdog ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Multiple versions of same node in changeset
On Sun, Jun 26, 2011 at 11:22 AM, Tobias Knerr o...@tobias-knerr.de wrote: Richard Fairhurst wrote: M∡rtin Koppenhoefer wrote: Yes, but is there a point of doing this within the same changeset? Yes, of course there is. If you're using an online editor you should save early and save often. When the user chooses to start/finish a changeset has no bearing on that. The problem is that saving and committing are, in this case, the same action. This is an easy conclusion to come to. The way I've come to think about it is that a changeset is merely a grouping of changes, and OSM has no concept of a commit. In an .07 (if/whenever that happens), I'd love to see a new concept called a transaction, which would be a commit. And then a changeset might just be a collection of transactions. - Serge ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Multiple versions of same node in changeset
On 26 Jun 2011, at 18:10, Serge Wroclawski wrote: On Sun, Jun 26, 2011 at 11:22 AM, Tobias Knerr o...@tobias-knerr.de wrote: Richard Fairhurst wrote: M∡rtin Koppenhoefer wrote: Yes, but is there a point of doing this within the same changeset? Yes, of course there is. If you're using an online editor you should save early and save often. When the user chooses to start/finish a changeset has no bearing on that. The problem is that saving and committing are, in this case, the same action. This is an easy conclusion to come to. The way I've come to think about it is that a changeset is merely a grouping of changes, and OSM has no concept of a commit. In an .07 (if/whenever that happens), I'd love to see a new concept called a transaction, which would be a commit. And then a changeset might just be a collection of transactions. If you use the diff uploads, then it is already the case that a changeset could be called a collection of transactions, though the transaction id is never exposed or stored. (Technically the transaction ids and status are used internally for the generation of the diffs). Shaun ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Multiple versions of same node in changeset
On Sun, Jun 26, 2011 at 2:01 PM, Shaun McDonald sh...@shaunmcdonald.me.uk wrote: If you use the diff uploads, then it is already the case that a changeset could be called a collection of transactions, though the transaction id is never exposed or stored. (Technically the transaction ids and status are used internally for the generation of the diffs). You're right Shaun. Let me clarify a bit. In a hypothetical .07, the transaction IDs would be exposed.This would have two clear benefits. First, it would provide a simple mechanism by which one could play the events.Each transaction could be played and then run in sequence. Based on a number of users who come to the project this is the expected behavior. Our current behavior is one that grew out of the project's history, but new developers often get tripped up on what exactly a changeset is, and why it's not atomic. A transaction could be assumed to be atomic, Another benefit of that would be the ability to have asynchronous transactions, which could lead to a better editing experience. An API call could happen quickly, the client could be given a transaction ID and then optionally not need to wait for the transaction to happen before letting the user move on. This isn't something that comes up often, but we do have instances where an upload takes a long time because the database is doing some validation- eg deletion of nodes requires that those nodes be checked against ways and relations which may contain that node, which makes that very expensive. Rejected uploads don't come up often, but because there's no concept of a transaction id to refer to after the call, an editor needs to block while the transaction takes place. If this could be eliminated, then the editing process could be made more smooth. It's a minor benefit, but not insignificant. - Serge Shaun ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Multiple versions of same node in changeset
On 26/06/11 19:52, Serge Wroclawski wrote: Another benefit of that would be the ability to have asynchronous transactions, which could lead to a better editing experience. An API call could happen quickly, the client could be given a transaction ID and then optionally not need to wait for the transaction to happen before letting the user move on. Matt is already planning that I believe, although the token used to monitor the progress of the upload would just be transient I believe rather than a long lived transaction ID. Tom -- Tom Hughes (t...@compton.nu) http://compton.nu/ ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Multiple versions of same node in changeset
Hi, Tobias Knerr wrote: I've just spotted several changesets where a large number of versions of the same node were created within a single changeset, e.g.: http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/8542345 Should that even be possible? Sure, most editors allow you to keep a changeset open and continue to upload to it. If you modify the same object several times, then this will lead to what you observed above. Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09 E008°23'33 ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Multiple versions of same node in changeset
If the user is saving their changes on a regular basis, then yes I would expect the same item to be in the changeset multiple times. In this case it looks as though the user has been moving the bus stop and then hitting the save button multiple times. (Potlatch2 will not automatically save and requires the user to choose when to save). Shaun On 25 Jun 2011, at 17:58, Tobias Knerr wrote: I've just spotted several changesets where a large number of versions of the same node were created within a single changeset, e.g.: http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/8542345 Should that even be possible? My assumption would have been that each object should appear at most once in a changeset. The user was working with Potlatch 2, but can this happen with other editors, too? -- Tobias Knerr ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Multiple versions of same node in changeset
Frederik Ramm wrote: Tobias Knerr wrote: I've just spotted several changesets where a large number of versions of the same node were created within a single changeset, e.g.: http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/8542345 Should that even be possible? Sure, most editors allow you to keep a changeset open and continue to upload to it. If you modify the same object several times, then this will lead to what you observed above. I optimistically assumed that the modifications are merged when the changeset is closed, thus creating a changeset indistinguishable from one that was created in one go. But it's obvious that I don't know anything about the inner workings of the API. Well, it seems I will have to convert that user to JOSM so he can temp-save locally instead of making a mess of the object history. ;) -- Tobias Knerr ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Multiple versions of same node in changeset
Shaun McDonald wrote: In this case it looks as though the user has been moving the bus stop and then hitting the save button multiple times. (Potlatch2 will not automatically save and requires the user to choose when to save). I suspect he was seeing if and how it renders. Naughty :) -- View this message in context: http://gis.638310.n2.nabble.com/Multiple-versions-of-same-node-in-changeset-tp6515184p6515418.html Sent from the General Discussion mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Multiple versions of same node in changeset
fun? Maybe each node had its own license ? /fun? gert -Oorspronkelijk bericht- Van: Nathan Edgars II [mailto:nerou...@gmail.com] Verzonden: zaterdag 25 juni 2011 20:18 Aan: talk@openstreetmap.org Onderwerp: Re: [OSM-talk] Multiple versions of same node in changeset Shaun McDonald wrote: In this case it looks as though the user has been moving the bus stop and then hitting the save button multiple times. (Potlatch2 will not automatically save and requires the user to choose when to save). I suspect he was seeing if and how it renders. Naughty :) -- View this message in context: http://gis.638310.n2.nabble.com/Multiple-versions-of-same-node-in-change set-tp6515184p6515418.html Sent from the General Discussion mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Multiple versions of same node in changeset
Hi, Tobias Knerr wrote: I optimistically assumed that the modifications are merged when the changeset is closed, thus creating a changeset indistinguishable from one that was created in one go. That would only be possible if the API were to somehow have a transaction for open changesets with some kind of isolation so that other users wouldn't see the half-committed edits. We don't have that. Well, it seems I will have to convert that user to JOSM so he can temp-save locally instead of making a mess of the object history. ;) If you're editing in a place where you have reason to believe that you're not the only one, uploading often isn't too bad a habit - reduces the likelihood of conflicts! Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09 E008°23'33 ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
