On Sat, Dec 12, 2009 at 1:09 AM, Liz <ed...@billiau.net> wrote: > On Sat, 12 Dec 2009, Shalabh wrote: > > While I am not advocating a fork (I am anyway voting a yes to ODBL), I > dont > > think a single community is always the answer. Single communities tend to > > get static for the lack of competition. All successful open source > projects > > have parallels, whether through forking or because of different organic > > origins. So I dont think if OSM has a parallel because of forking, it > would > > be bad. Gives people more choices to choose from and thats what freedom > is > > all about. > > Honestly I'm happy to have GoogleMap as the competitor. > > > Sorry, google is anyway not the only competitor. India already has mapmyindia offering maps and navigation instruments. Need I say, OSM is nowhere near being used for that because we have so little data. I am sure all geographies have their own local competition as well. So, a market with 2 competitors (OSM and Google) is neither real, nor possible. The world as a maket for mapping and geodata based applications is too large to be served by the bad G and the good OSM. I dont have any delusions about OSM's grandeur.
So, the faster we reconcile to the difference of opinion we seem to have on the license issue, the faster we move forward, whether forked or not. Regards, Shalabh
_______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
