On Sun, Jul 10, 2011 at 10:02 AM, Richard Fairhurst
<rich...@systemed.net> wrote:
> I think it's reasonably obvious by now that the two sides in this debate
> aren't ever going to be reconciled.
[snip]
> So, I think, we need to get away from this idea that a fork is a bad thing.
> It isn't. There are two divergent communities, and it doesn't do either side
> any good to try and hold them together when they're so opposed.
I'd say recognizing that the fork is not a bad thing is part of
reconciling the two sides in the debate. And by reconciling, I don't
mean that one side is going to give in and exclusively use the license
of the other side. But I still don't see why FOSM and OSMF can't work
together, despite the license (and governance) disagreement.
> OSM people needn't invade the FOSM mailing lists and vice versa.
Speaking as a moderator of the osm-fork mailing list (but without
having confirmed this with the other moderators), I invite anyone who
is willing to engage in productive discussion to join us, regardless
of their "affiliation" with any particular project.
And I hope the OSMF is not going to try to exclude FOSM from its OSM
mailing lists. FOSM is a content fork, out of necessity ("phase 4"),
but it has no desire to fork the formats, the APIs, the rendering
software, the editing software, etc. This will only happen if it
proves to be necessary, and with good communication and cooperation,
it shouldn't be.
The osm-fork mailing list is there for discussions which are outside
of the scope of (or otherwise undesired on) other OSM mailing lists.
_______________________________________________
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
