Hello Steve and everyone,
Actually, the license redaction algorithm is not opaque and
mysterious to me. It's unknown to me.
And how were we supposed to find out about it when there is
no communication? That is the ongoing problem with the license change
and OSM in general: no communication. No newsletters, no general
emails, nothing to let people know what's happening. Email lists
don't cut it for us mere mortals who find them overly geeky. How
about some communication for the rest of us?
Charlotte
At 12:07 AM 6/6/2012, you wrote:
On 5 June 2012 20:56, stevea <steveaOSM at softworkers.com> wrote:
But "socially," or more properly stated, in the context of "reaching OSM
consensus," what does our community think of (rather wholesale)
reverts of a
contributor who has not agreed to the CT? Are we OK with
that? Apologies
if this is already clearly stated somewhere. But if so, I haven't seen it
and it is high time we freshen up how/where we are about this.
andrzej replied:
Is it a pressing issue though? Mike N already said this, but the
license redaction algorithm is being designed to do no more damage
than a revert of the tainted edits, with the exception of undeletions
mentioned by NE2. So, by my understanding, the best you can get by
reverting edits is a state similar to that which you'll obtain by
doing nothing and moving on to actual useful mapping.
SteveA here: Then I think what might make most sense is to point
Charlotte, me, and other readers of this list to Mike N's license
redaction algorithm thread. I guess I missed that.
Charlotte's original point (both echoed in her/this recent
thread-start and in another email she sent to me privately -- in
April or May?) that she finds the whole "license redaction
algorithm" (or whatever is going to happen) to be opaque and
mysterious, without any easy way to discover this, or know (well)
what to work around (blars' edits, for example) or not. I tend to agree.
I have used the JOSM revert changeset to good effect before, I know
that users like NE2 and others have the skill to write/wield/deploy
powerful scripts that "do" high-level crafted semantically-laser
beam effects. But these might be more in the open and transparent,
so that we (lowly and middle-level users, if I must be so crass as
to put it like that) can see these things as up-and-coming, and move
on to important things.
Indeed, Charlotte asks:
Perhaps some who know JOSM could take a look at the most recent
uploads by "blars" to see what the
effect of reverting those changes would be.
When in fact, she (and I, and all users in OSM, really) simply want
to know: is some "magic" smart-bot going to auto-magically "fix"
the license problems, or should I keep working based off of BADMAP
to get rid of non CT-user edits? If so, can such efforts come out
of the shadows (please?!) so "most OSMers" can best focus our efforts?
Keep up the dialog,
SteveA
California
_______________________________________________
Talk-us mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Charlotte Wolter
927 18th Street Suite A
Santa Monica, California
90403
+1-310-597-4040
[email protected]
Skype: thetechlady
The Four Internet Freedoms
Freedom to visit any site on the Internet
Freedom to access any content or service that is not illegal
Freedom to attach any device that does not interfere with the network
Freedom to know all the terms of a service, particularly any that
would affect the first three freedoms.
_______________________________________________
Talk-us mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
