On Sat, Jul 17, 2010 at 7:07 PM, Apollinaris Schoell <ascho...@gmail.com>wrote:
> > On 17 Jul 2010, at 2:05 , Heiko Jacobs wrote: > > > > > I cannot accept a process with loss of data. > > If there is a loss of data I will leave OSM. > > > > there is no loss of data! It has always been said that the old data will > remain available under the old license. > > > The only possibility to avoid loss of data (if process proposed isn't > > changed because of this discussions, I'm still hoping for this ...) > > is to (ab)use the licence change question as a vote, hoping that > > reaching the critical mass will fail. Using this vote it might be easyer > > because they want a really high of percentage of user accepting new > licence. > > If my vote failed and licence is changing with loss of data, > > I leave the project including my data, because of combination of > > vote and licence change of my data … > > > > strategic voting is really wrong and stupid. playing this game by many will > put the project on more risk for nothing. If you think Odbl is the better > license vote for it or PD as a third choice. > If you don't like the process of how data is converted what is considered > minor edits and can still be relicensed without loss … then better raise > your voice there. > absolutely agree we need to work on a smooth process to minimize loss. > There is no decision on this process there is no plan there are just many > ideas. So let's make this switch or abandon it as fast as possible. > No decision is the worst for OSM. personally I don't mind which of the 2 > license we use but we need a clear statement where we go. this took already > too long and holds back imports from non PD sources. Puts all consumers of > OSM data at risk to have to back out at some time or go a very painful way > to mix data from old planet with new Odbl for some time. > > Indeed, we've been suffering from this license-twiddling induced stasis for far too long now. That's why I've proposed that the LWG/OSMF achieve a clear and undeniable mandate by September 1st or just drop the whole thing. We can't afford to let this cancer continue eating away at the project any longer. > > > If it is divided in two questions, the chance of avoiding licence change > > and lost of date will sink, because only 2/3 or similar is needed(?), > > the probability that I leave theproject arises, but my data will rest > > inside OSM … > > > > yes, the second question has never been asked, so why do you expect an > answer. and again data is not lost. I am sure the OSMF has the same wish as > you and I and will come up with a reasonable plan when the first is answered > positively. > > > > _______________________________________________ > talk mailing list > talk@openstreetmap.org > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk >
_______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
