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
t
On Sun, Jun 26, 2011 at 2:01 PM, Shaun McDonald
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
> in
On 26 Jun 2011, at 18:10, Serge Wroclawski wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 26, 2011 at 11:22 AM, Tobias Knerr 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
On Sun, Jun 26, 2011 at 11:22 AM, Tobias Knerr 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 us
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
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 th
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
Am 26.06.2011 13:53, schrieb M∡rtin Koppenhoefer:
> 2011/6/25 Frederik Ramm :
>> 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
2011/6/25 Frederik Ramm :
> 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
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
Maybe each node had its own license ?
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
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 :)
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 edito
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
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 ope
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 ch
16 matches
Mail list logo
