Re: [talk-au] Relicensing per changeset?
On 5 February 2011 15:30, Andrew Gregory andrew.greg...@gmail.com wrote: Surely that can't be correct? That is the way it was explained on one of the mailing lists a while back. I haven't seen any notice that it is going to change, though with the mushroom treatment we're getting, I could have easily missed it. The theory is that if you are improving on a previous way, it is still based on that way, and is therefore tainted, and they'd rather lose data than have stuff they're not sure of. For example, I've surveyed an awful lot of the Perth northern suburbs, but I started off by tracing Nearmap imagery. My understanding is that Nearmap haven't agreed to the new licensing but They have no problem with the license, it's the CT's they have issue with (which allows the license to change later). I don't know if they've finalised them yet, though. nevertheless I've since personally surveyed the streets, corrected alignments, added names and changed source=nearmap to source=survey. I would understand if data and records of the original source=nearmap disappeared with the license change, but the subsequent source=survey edits would be able to be kept? Dropping data simply because at one time it was in an incompatible-license state but is now no longer sounds incredibly destructive to me. Well, yes. This is one reason I've stopped putting data in, if I don't know the original source of the ways I'm working on. If you want to be sure your changes can be kept, and you know the original way is bad, you could delete it entirely and draw your own. Is what's going to happen documented anywhere? I've had a poke around the wiki, but can't see anything relevant to how the data is being handled. There's various stuff on the OSMF section somewhere, but it's not easy to find. Mostly I've stumbled across it from various links people have dropped in different mailing lists. And most of that seems to be out of date, anyway (meeting minutes, etc). If there's a simple, laid out roadmap anywhere, I haven't seen it. The closest I saw had a six week plan, starting about this time last year - it lasted about a week. Stephen ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Relicensing per changeset?
- Original Message - From: Andrew Gregory andrew.greg...@gmail.com To: OSM Australian Talk List talk-au@openstreetmap.org Sent: Saturday, February 05, 2011 5:30 AM Subject: Re: [talk-au] Relicensing per changeset? On 3 February 2011 08:38, Stephen Hope slh...@gmail.com wrote: On 3 February 2011 09:28, David Murn da...@incanberra.com.au wrote: I also wonder how this works, using your example, if the user had entered street names and then another user came along and fixed a spelling mistake in one which they had surveyed themselves. When the changeset is relicenced, you have v1 of an object under a non-compatible licence, and v2 is compatible, so what happens to the object? It goes away. All objects get rolled back to the last valid state that have no unlicensed edits before them. So any object where v1 is unlicensed is gone, no matter how many changes have been done to it since. Surely that can't be correct? For example, I've surveyed an awful lot of the Perth northern suburbs, but I started off by tracing Nearmap imagery. My understanding is that Nearmap haven't agreed to the new licensing but nevertheless I've since personally surveyed the streets, corrected alignments, added names and changed source=nearmap to source=survey. I would understand if data and records of the original source=nearmap disappeared with the license change, but the subsequent source=survey edits would be able to be kept? Dropping data simply because at one time it was in an incompatible-license state but is now no longer sounds incredibly destructive to me. As I understand it the position is potentially far worse than you outline above. Individual bits of data won't be dropped because at one one time it was sourced from Nearmap. ALL your data will be marked as non-compliant if you cant agree to the CT's. This is why in my situation the relicensing per changeset would be so useful. It allows the 80 % of my contributions to be marked as CT/ODbL compliant. However, as yet I am unclear what actually happens to data which has been entered by a user account which does not agree to the CT's. (see below) Is what's going to happen documented anywhere? I've had a poke around the wiki, but can't see anything relevant to how the data is being handled. The nearest I can see to an answer is in the paragraph relation to phase 4 of the implementation plan [1] ; What do we do with the people who have declined or not responded [to agree to the CT's]? Their contributions would not be available under the future ODbL version of the database. Which presumably implies that all their data, and anything based on that data will be removed from copies of the planet files, and will no longer be shown when using any of the editors. I presume that some time in the next 7 weeks (ie before 31 March 2011) it might be made more apparent what will happen, since in order for an ODbL complaint database to be available on 1 April I trust that someone is working at the moment, not only on the principles involved, but also on the actual coding necessary. David -- Andrew [1] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Open_Database_License/Implementation_Plan#PHASE_4_-_CC-BY-SA_edits_no_longer_accepted._.28Phase_3_.2B_8_weeks_subject_to_critical_mass.29 ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Relicensing per changeset?
On Sat, Feb 5, 2011 at 12:34 PM, David Groom revi...@pacific-rim.net wrote: [ ... ] I presume that some time in the next 7 weeks (ie before 31 March 2011) it might be made more apparent what will happen, since in order for an ODbL complaint database to be available on 1 April I trust that someone is working at the moment, not only on the principles involved, but also on the actual coding necessary. A small thing perhaps, but the next step requested by the board prior to 31 March is Phase 3, which adds the decline option to the current accept option. I expect that the improved CTs (1.2.4) will be available at the same time, pending the required translations. March 31 is not a switch over date, http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Open_Database_License/Implementation_Plan ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Relicensing per changeset?
On Sat, 5 Feb 2011 13:45:52 -0500 Richard Weait rich...@weait.com wrote: A small thing perhaps, but the next step requested by the board prior to 31 March is Phase 3, which adds the decline option to the current accept option. I expect that the improved CTs (1.2.4) will be available at the same time, pending the required translations. March 31 is not a switch over date, http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Open_Database_License/Implementation_Plan In that case I've missed some meeting minutes, because that is not what I last read. Mushroom theory confirmed. My understanding (shared by some others) was that Phase 3 was to start 1st April 2011, that is if not accepting new terms, no editing. the Implementation Plan referenced above doesn't seem to have adding the Decline button in it, but it is an important step. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
