Why are you cross posting this to the talk-au list, that seems to
indicate he's right...
On 13 August 2010 16:20, Steve Bennett wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 4:16 PM, Nathan Edgars II wrote:
>> I love the implication here that you're 'poisonous' if you don't support the
>> license changes (an
On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 4:16 PM, Nathan Edgars II wrote:
> I love the implication here that you're 'poisonous' if you don't support the
> license changes (and vice versa).
That wasn't my intention. To be clearer:
* Some of us are supportive of the license changes,
* some of us pull our heads in a
I'd just like to mention that we have our lawyers looking at the CTs and the
licences (in fact I was in a long meeting about that just yesterday) and
we'll be responding to the LWG shortly. After that I hope we'll be able to
make our position clear on the mailing lists.
Regards
Ben
--
Ben Last
Nearmap as far as I know haven't agreed to the new Contributor Terms
(CTs) or the ODBL, so anyone that has traced anything from Nearmap
isn't able to agree to the new license, doing so would put you in
breach of contract with Nearmap which would also breach clause 1 on
the new Contributor Terms.
_
On 12 August 2010 13:05, Nick Hocking wrote:
> Ok - just to clarify.
>
> If I've edited a road then the bot does it's thing and then I make further
> improvements,
> the bots effect can be automatically removed without losing either of my
> edits.
>
I don't know the details yet, but the document
On 12 August 2010 13:07, John Smith wrote:
> On 12 August 2010 22:03, Liz wrote:
>> I can immediately think of an edit which could fall into the above category,
>> and it would not be classified as "abusive" because it did add additional
>> information to the tags.
>
> Not only that, but others o
On 12 August 2010 22:03, Liz wrote:
> I can immediately think of an edit which could fall into the above category,
> and it would not be classified as "abusive" because it did add additional
> information to the tags.
Not only that, but others on the talk-au list at the time thought it
was a good
"Thankfully worrying too much.
We have the full history of all changes, his edits would not be
carried across (unwound) but the existing data if approved for ODbL
would be carried across.
There is also a plan of action if people are found to be making these
sorts of abusive edits.
There is a full
On Thu, 12 Aug 2010, Nick Hocking wrote:
> It seems as though if someone ran a bot to add just one tag to most of the
> streets in (say) Canberra
On Thu, 12 Aug 2010, Grant Slater wrote:
> There is also a plan of action if people are found to be making these
> sorts of abusive edits.
I can immed
On 12 August 2010 21:28, Nick Hocking wrote:
> Have I got this right or am I worrying too much?
It's unclear what will happen at this point, since no one has the
chance to actually disagree any more, although there was a thread
about what to do about people that aren't contactable.
The outcome w
On 12 August 2010 12:28, Nick Hocking wrote:
>
> It seems as though if someone ran a bot to add just one tag to most of the
> streets in (say) Canberra and then failed to
> agree to a re-licence, then all those streets in Canberra would be thrown
> away in their entirety (or hidden from publicatio
On 12 August 2010 21:13, Richard Weait wrote:
> There is no decline button, and no obligation to answer yet. Existing
> Contributor Voluntary Re-licensing is for those who wish to accept the
> terms and get on with mapping.
To be valid there seems to be lacking a few significant details:
* How
Its really disappointing that the introductory paragraph which says "Please
read the agreement below and press the agree button to confirm that you accept
the terms of this agreement for your existing and future contributions." does
not containing any warning that if you have used any source whi
I haven't read all the posts regarding this matter so maybe I have missed
some clarifications but
It seems as though if someone ran a bot to add just one tag to most of the
streets in (say) Canberra and then failed to
agree to a re-licence, then all those streets in Canberra would be thrown
aw
News today from Mike Collinson, Chair of the OSMF License Working Group:
As promised, and long awaited, the next phase of the OSM License
Upgrade has arrived. Phase 2 - Existing Contributor Voluntary
Re-licensing [1] has begun, and you may indicate your acceptance of
the new Contributor Terms fo
15 matches
Mail list logo
