What are we doing?
Is it *really* worth changing the license if we risk loosing so very
large parts of what we in the end want to create and preserve, even
protect?
When will the information in red be deleted unless the contributing
user accepts the new licence agreement?
cheers
BengtB
I have not seen anything on the wiki or elsewhere that data will be
_removed_ from OSM for non-relicensed data. Are you sure this is even
considered? References?
/Simon
bengt bäverman be...@baverman.se writes:
What are we doing?
Is it *really* worth changing the license if we risk loosing
Only what Hanno Hecker said below. If that is true or not I don't know.
/B
2010/11/10 Simon Josefsson si...@josefsson.org:
I have not seen anything on the wiki or elsewhere that data will be
_removed_ from OSM for non-relicensed data. Are you sure this is even
considered? References?
What kind of stupidity is this? I was acertained that nothing would be
removed in the licence change, and therefore supported it. If lots of
data will be removed, I STRONGLY OPPOSE this licence change, of course
far too late in the process. This will, in any case, probably lower my
ambition to
Also, I'm rather certain that most people accept the new terms, but
simply don't understand it's important to check the checkboxes. People
who have left the project will not explicitely accept this. It seems
unbelievably stupid by the OSM foundation to vote for a non-backwards
compatible licence
On Thu, 11 Nov 2010 02:24:55 +0100
Andreas Vilén andreas.vi...@gmail.com wrote:
What kind of stupidity is this? I was acertained that nothing would be
removed in the licence change, and therefore supported it. If lots of
data will be removed, I STRONGLY OPPOSE this licence change, of course
Yes, I have read through something like that before. That doesn't
answer what happens with the entire city of Gothenburg... For example,
much of it is mapped by a user who has not edited since October
2009... The probability that this user will see and accept the new
terms is very low. We can,
On Thu, 11 Nov 2010 06:49:02 +0100
Andreas Vilén andreas.vi...@gmail.com wrote:
Yes, I have read through something like that before. That doesn't
answer what happens with the entire city of Gothenburg... For example,
much of it is mapped by a user who has not edited since October
2009... The
Now that I have read the pages on the migration to ODbL I may have
reacted to strongly and to soon. As far as I can see the data will
not be deleted, just not available through the normal channels.
However a copy of the existing planet.osm will be saved for the
forseeable future.
There
On Thu, 11 Nov 2010 08:07:47 +0100
Susanna Björverud susanna.bjorve...@telia.com wrote:
When you say will be removed what does that really imply. F ex way
24744222 which I originally added (and I have accepted the new terms)
have subsequently been refined by two other users, whom I guess not
10 matches
Mail list logo
