On Saturday 28 February 2009, Richard Fairhurst wrote: > > My hope basically when starting this thread was that these > > fundamental issues would have been cleared up by now in > > legal-talk or wherever since you now made the schedule available. > > Seriously - who is this "you"?!!!
With "you" I mean the people who are pushing ahead with this license change. The license plan didn't just come out of nowhere. I'm sure some people discussed it somewhere. So I mean those people. > There is no "you" in OSM. There's a big "us". But just because there's a big "us", is it too much to ask "us" for "our" opinion about the license change and for "us" to mention "our" concerns to the people mentioned above (from now on referred to as "them")? I personally just don't like it that "they" just decided that in one month I have to immediately make a decision on relicensing my data. The implication of that question is too much to begin with, and as said I'm very wary that because I say "yes" I would pass the approvals across some kind of threshold which would delete say 10% of all data and their derivative data which might include a lot of my work. I need to know first that that won't happen. > So "I want a very detailed answer", in your previous message, is the > wrong way to go about things. Well sorry, but I really do want it. Who comes up with it (it could be me) doesn't matter. This should really be resolved before getting to the question we will all get in a month. Ben _______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
